stefano zammattio

image
marketing

Biography has not been added

etc

's contributions
Articles
Comments
Discussions
    • The article seems to have the aim of leading the reader to think that FPGAs are going to start falling over and dying all the time unless they are space qualified. The first two figures are a bit misleading as you can see the numbers on the left hand axis. It looks like a 50% variability but in fact it's more like 20%. http://ulysses.sr.unh.edu/NeutronMonitor/Misc/neutron2.html Given the brief historical data and the long term stability of the sun it would look to me to be fairly safe assumption that sometime soon the neutron flux density will start to fall again to follow the approximately sinusoidal cycle that has existed in the past. The article states "By 2008 the sun was entering an unusually quiet period for sunspots" but draws the conclusion "neutron flux rates are continuing to increase, which means that problems once confined to the heavens have come home to roost for system designers here on Earth." Doesn't seems to match to me..... FIT rates are an issue for all to be aware of however do you look at the FIT rates for our other components or our manufacturing quality and materials? If you don't already assess in this way these numbers may not have much relevance to your application. It'd be good to have a comparison with the failure rates of other common system components (non ecc-dram, asics, lead free solder!!) "This is a "firm error," and it persists until detected and cleared by rebooting or power cycling the volatile SRAM FPGA and reloading the FPGA with the correct configuration programming stream. Mitigation of firm errors is virtually impossible in SRAM FPGAs. " For sure the errors cannot be prevented but their effects can be and are mitigated, we are even told that smart SRAM FPGAs detect these errors and can fix them (note this can be done automatically). The conclusion in this paragraph is a little misleading. Othert FPGA vendors also say different things about the relationship between process generations and number of failures - it seems it's not as simple as smaller = more errors .....

    • Or is it that younger coders have a smaller salary figure/expectation - this doesn't mean that they are cheaper, but some employers don't understand this, just like they don't really understand the knowledge/experience/skill required to be truly effective in embedded.