WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
Keep cool!
- Thread starter EvilDragon
- Start date
Basically, yes. And now Tony Lindgren will receive a prototype next week to help out.
No other known issues are left so far.
Sent from my XT1650-03 using Tapatalk
No other known issues are left so far.
Sent from my XT1650-03 using Tapatalk
Zwerg01
board's own troll
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2017
- Messages
- 95
So, the slow mux/emmc is now a feature and not a bug?
Eight Bit
Hardcore Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2010
- Messages
- 11,411
The guy from Ti I vaguely mentioned in an earlier post.Nice, more help!
Who is he?
Edit: okay not the Ti Guy, mixing him up with Tomi
hns
Well-Known Member
OMAP2+ Linux maintainer: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linu.../linux.git/tree/MAINTAINERS?h=v4.13-rc2#n9638Nice, more help!
Who is he?
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
It was determined that without the mux the eMMC was only slightly faster. So "reasonable tradeoff" is more appropriate.
Yep. There are always trade-offs in hardware. It just is important they're reasonable, and in this case, they are.
You would not notice any real speed difference in usage.
Kippykip
BFG 9000
It was determined most would be happy with about 10 mb/s (or less I don't remember) slower emmc so everyone can keep the muxed MicroSD slot without a major and expensive redesign.
Barely a difference in speed at all really. In my opinion it was a very reasonable decision.
levi
Still fresh, damnit!
I hope you're just being lazy with capitalisation there, and really mean 10MB/s, because 10Mb/s is about 1.25MB/s, and technically even with lower case m meaning milli rather than mega, 10mb/s would be about 0.000001164B/s (or a full byte every 10 days)
But 10MB/s beats the drive I'm running this OS out of, so I hope it's that after all.
Zwerg01
board's own troll
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2017
- Messages
- 95
No. This electrical analysis and simulation was unneccesarry. It was impropper setting in uboot.
Kippykip
BFG 9000
Yeah it was just lazyness, MB is what I meant.I hope you're just being lazy with capitalisation there, and really mean 10MB/s, because 10Mb/s is about 1.25MB/s, and technically even with lower case m meaning milli rather than mega, 10mb/s would be about 0.000001164B/s (or a full byte every 10 days)
But 10MB/s beats the drive I'm running this OS out of, so I hope it's that after all.
I hope you're just being lazy with capitalisation there, and really mean 10MB/s, because 10Mb/s is about 1.25MB/s, and technically even with lower case m meaning milli rather than mega, 10mb/s would be about 0.000001164B/s (or a full byte every 10 days)
But 10MB/s beats the drive I'm running this OS out of, so I hope it's that after all.
This just taught me a lot.
I was always worried and would write out Mega Bytes instead of saying MB, to be sure that me opposite knew what I meant and I never looked up the exact notation.
Now I don't have to. Cheers for that
I'm not interested in Pyra until the 4GB is stable and no known issues are left. I really want one. I might even wait to hear that a newer CPU module is in dev, since the shipping CPU is a couple years old now. I've been burned on portable electronics so many times, but Pyra seems like the real deal to me. At this point, I trust Pyra more than I trust Wacom (been burned twice by them abandoning products!).
Djoga'Ro
moonstruck
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2016
- Messages
- 2,499
Amnesia can help with that.
ible
professional vim user
well i think they'll make the production boards with the new layout anyways? or maybe i missed something...
elvissteinjr
Very Active Member
The benchmark numbers for the eMMC that were thrown around were actually between 70 and 103 MB/s. The theoretically max. speed is crippled with the mux, but random access is already way below the crippled max. speed in practice, so it's highly debatable if there is an actual loss here.
OppositeDay
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2017
- Messages
- 36
How so? I thought max speeds went down by less than 10MB/s as well.
