Recent searches
Search options
To personalize them, we need:
1. Some design and development environment, where we design and test specific conigurations for given functionality. And this part is rather resource-intensive.
2. Some "flashing" environment to "imprint" existing models onto generic FPGA modules. Which is much less resource-intensive than the previous part.
Now, I can imagine that, for the sake of #maintenance and #resillience, I may use FPGAs to build all kinds of devices around them. Then, just in case of failure (EMP, maybe) I can safely stock a pile of generic modules, an imprinter and a library of models so I can replace whatever is broken, without looking for a specialised chip.
Does it make sense and why not? ;-)
#postapo #hitec #critical #infrastructure #collapse #doomer musings.
You've got the general idea. The development environment consists of (typically) a hardware definition language (#vhdl or #verilog), and a toolchain (usually vendor specific, though there are some open source ones) that synthesizes the code into a logic equation list. And finally a toolchain that takes that netlist and maps it into the individual small discrete functions and configures the routing between them.
There is volatile memory on the device that stores the current configuration and must be loaded (many ways) on power up. There are a few models that have non-volatile memory that stores the configuration and loads itself. In high radiation environments, there are even fewer (and very expensive) models that have write-once-non-volatile memory for configuration.
I don't think your idea of using them as a generic purpose drop in replacement for things is particularly a good idea. The board environment is honestly more important than what you're doing in logic.