►
From YouTube: FPGA Next Steps at ORI 3 April 2021
Description
Next steps for the Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) work at Open Research Institute (ORI). Recorded 3 April 2021.
https://github.com/phase4space/p4xdmt_hw_protoype
https://github.com/phase4space/receiver-development
A
A
I
think
we
can
get
started
so
the
agenda
for
today's
meeting
is
what
what
are
the
next
steps
needed
for
to
get
the
receiver
up
and
running?
There
are
few
pending
items
from
the
current
transmitter
project
like
we
need
to
carry
out
integration
and
testing
and
some
code
improvements,
removing
ad971
dma
blocks,
so
we
can
come
to
those
ones
later,
but
priority
main
aim
of
this
meeting
is
to
to
lay
out
a
broad
level
plan
about
the
receiver.
B
Hey
so
I
saw
from
the
chat
that
michelle
mentioned
that
there
was
some
talk
of
maybe
moving
to
the
gse
implementation
next
rather
than
in
receiver.
So
I
don't
know
if
that's
that's
next
in
the
pipeline
or
yeah.
B
B
B
So
on
the
receiver,
I
have
started
looking
at
it.
I
think
there's
going
to
be
a
bit
of
algorithm
work
before
we
get
to
the
actual
fpga
implementation.
B
B
Yeah
so
basically
the
well
at
a
high
level.
The
receiver
is
going
to
be
composed
of
well
a
match,
filter,
symbol,
synchronization
timing,
phase,
synchronization
and
then
some
kind
of
demodulator,
so
the
filter
and
the
demodulator
for
basically
cram
or
qpsk
are
quite
straightforward.
B
A
C
The
the
reason
I
brought
it
up
is
because
there
is
actually
several
things
that
we
could
tackle
from
here
and
so,
and
I
think
that
the
the
gse,
the
the
transport
layer
and
presenting
data
to
flow
through
to
the
the
transmitter
can
be
done
in
parallel
with
with
beginning
the
receiver
work.
So
I
didn't
intend
for
that
to
be
to
come
across
as
some
sort
of
either
or
at
all.
So
the
advantage
there
would
be
that
the
we've
talked
we
talked
about
this
right
beforehand.
C
Expo
would
be
that
the
transmitter
would
actually
have
traction
on
some
some
useful
data.
You
know
things
that
that
would
make
a
good
demo
so
for
the
purposes
of
making
good
demonstrations,
then
sorting
out
how
to
feed
the
data
into
the
transmitter
apart
from
a
receiver
system,
would
be
of
value.
So
so
that
was
that
was
what
I
intended
by
by
bringing
that
up.
B
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
have
some
parallel
developments
because
yeah,
I
think,
with
the
kind
of
asynchronous
nature
of
development.
If
too
many
too
many
people
are
working
in
one
sec,
one
portion
of
the
system-
it's
not
that
efficient
yeah,
I
think
probably
parallel
developments
is
a
good
idea.
C
Yeah
it
it.
It
does
also
broaden
a
little
bit
the
the
things
that
people
can
can
do,
that
we
have
a
number
of
volunteers
that
are
enthusiastic,
maybe
not
as
proficient
with
hdl
as
as
they
they
would
like
to
be,
but
really
want
to
be
involved.
But
they
don't
want
to
be
part
of
something
that
they
that
they
perceive
as
a
critical
path,
or
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
that,
and
it
is
it's
not
just
us.
C
This
is
a
pretty
common
thing
in
in
any
volunteer
position,
and
even
in
commercial
places
where
you
know,
people
are
a
little
hesitant
to
to
sign
up
for
something
that
they
can.
You
know
if
there's
if
it's,
if
it's
one
path
forward-
and
this
is
the
the
direction
that
the
the
thing
is
going-
it's
a
very
binary
choice.
So
I
think
it
would
be
worth
spreading
out
a
little
bit
and
and
tackling
some
things
that
can
feed
into
the
transmitter
part.
C
The
care
that
we
have
to
take
there
is
to
make
sure
that
we
have
the
interfaces
or
the
the
method
of
presenting
the
data
somewhat
settled
so
that
we
don't
have
things
shifting
too
much
or
too
spread
out.
D
B
Yeah,
I
think
deadlines
are
brilliant
for
a
force
and
function
to
really
make
things
come
together.
I
think
we
found
that
with
the
ham
expo,
we
didn't
quite
make
100.
We
got
very
very
close
because
of
having
that
deadline.
C
Yeah,
should
we
should
we
pick
something
else
in
the
future,
coming
up
that
that
might
be
our
next
demo
and
and
and
do
it
again.
C
Okay,
yeah.
Well,
I
have
a
good
list
of
the
when
we
were
talking
about
conferences
and
other
meetings
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
that
that
list
I'm
supposed
to
to
publish
and
I've
been
asked
about
it
several
times
since
then.
So
what
I'll
do
is
is
actually
go
ahead
and
and
make
that
neat
and
presentable
and
then
look
really
hard
at
the
scheduled
events.
D
C
C
They
don't
do
a
lot
of
the
tech,
demos
and
things
like
that,
but
anyway,
that
I'll
I'll
take
that
on
to
try
to
figure
out
what
might
be
a
good
place
to
demonstrate,
and
if
anyone
has
any
suggestions
that
weren't
already
on
the
list
or
aren't
on
the
list
that
I'm
gonna
put
out
later
today,
then
let
me
know
so
we'll
go
ahead
and
do
that
again,
we'll
pick
something
that
we're
going
to
target
as
a
demonstration
and
it
will.
It
will
serve
as
a
rallying
point
and
a
focus
for
for
the
work.
B
Sounds
good
on
your
point
about
the
interfaces.
I
think
that's
a
very
valid
point,
and
maybe
that
comes
into
the
scoping
of
the
the
gse
work,
because
that's
really
the
the
center
point
where
things
come
into
and
leave
so
they're
having
a
good
yeah,
a
good
specification
of
of
the
interfaces.
There
would
define
a
lot
of
the
interfaces
of
the
whole
system.
A
I
think
I
agree
with
you
considering
that
in
ham
expo
we
missed
the
thing
for
demoing
transmitter,
so
getting
that
part
complete
and
as
thomas
mentioned,
that
for
receiving
a
risk
receiver,
we
have
to
do
some
algorithm
development
first
before
we
move
to
rtl
part.
A
So
if
we
can
take
these
activities
parallel
and
make
the
transmitter
as
a
diamond
demobile
box
along
with
gse
work
and
parallelly
continue
with
some
python
development
which
paves
the
way
for
rta
development
for
future
receiver,
I
think
that
that
that
that's
a
good
way
to
move
forward.
That's
what
I
think
yeah.
B
The
other
thing
that
I'm
also
thinking
about
which
is
maybe
slightly
outside
the
scope
of
this
meeting,
but
maybe
starting
some
of
the
hardware
aspects
as
well,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
think
forward
to
if
we
have
the
receiver
and
the
transmitter
get
into
a
mature
state.
We
don't
then
want
to
have
to
start
the
hardware
from
from
zero.
B
I
don't
know
I
have
the
feeling
that
if
we,
if
we
tried
to
kick
it
off,
there
might
be
people
in
the
community
that
would
be
interested
in
working
on.
It
is
my
gut
feeling.
I
don't
have
any.
You
know
data
to
back
that
up.
Okay,.
C
I
agree,
I
think,
you're.
I
think
your
instincts
are
good
here,
but
it
will
take
and
there
may
be
some
false
starts
and
everything-
and
I
we
do
have
people
that
are
interested
in
layout
and
we
do
have
people
that
that
aren't
here
currently
due
to
health
health
reasons
that
are
on
the
way
back,
that
that
would
be
well
positioned
to
to
put
some
horsepower
behind
that
too.
C
So
it
will
get
better,
but
I
would
say
like
the
two
things
that
we're
talking
about
the
the
algorithm
development:
yes
absolutely
and
then
the
gse
transmitter
side.
So
those
two
sections.
C
I
think
we
can
go
ahead
and
start
a
parallel
development
on
those
and
articulate
it
and
all
of
that
and
then
pick
a
deadline
for
yeah
pick
the
deadlines
that
we
that
we
want
and
then
the
layout,
though,
will
start
recruiting
and
building
and
waiting
and
seeing
so
there's
there's
these
four
people
that
I
can
think
of
that
that
may
want
to
start
now.
So
it
would
be
like
a
trailing
trailing
behind
these
other
two,
rather
than
all
three
abreast.
You
know
marching
into
the
future
yeah
I
can.
I
can
help
with
that.
A
So
yeah
considering
gse
is
a
broad
level
activity.
Then
we
have
this
python
algorithm
development,
and
then
we
have
some
modifications
related
to
transmitter
that
thomas
we
talked
about,
like
maybe
removing
of
ad97
dma
blocks
and
getting
the
system
ready.
So
I
think
these
four
level,
four
block
level,
broad
level
items
we
have
going
forward
and
then
what
I
think
is
that
we
are
we
can.
A
We
can
go
through
these
points
and
then
divide
them
into
further
tasks
to
as
we
move
forward
for
the
next
steps.
B
Sounds
good
what's
the
best
way
to
document
and
communicate
this
to
the
wider
community,
email
or
some
kind
of
website,
or
I
don't
know,
what's
your,
what
your
thoughts
are
well.
C
I
don't
know
how
did
you,
how
did
you
think
the
ham
expo
repo
worked
for
the
for
organizing
the
ham
expo?
It
was
a
branch
and
then
I
think
it
became
a
repo.
How?
How
did
that
work
out.
B
I
think
it
worked
generally.
Okay,
multiple
people
were
committing
to
it
and
in
pull
requests.
So
I
think
that
was
generally
positive.
Okay,.
C
I
think
we
should
do
that
again,
that
that
seemed
to
work
really
well
and
it
was
easy
to
share
and
easy
to
talk
about
and
easy
to
point
people
to.
So
I
think
that
that
if
we
do
that
again
that
that
either
make
another
repo
I
know
we
talked
about,
there's
differences
between
branches
and
repos
and
everything,
but
if
we
make
another
repository
or
fork
then
and
then
fold
every
it
allows
us
to
fold
everything
back
when
it's
completely
done.
I
that
that
worked.
C
That
worked
really
well,
I
think,
and
if
we,
if
we
want
to
to
do
this
next
set
of
work
using
that
as
a
model,
then
then
it
would.
It
would
be
easy
to
share
and
and
easy
to
talk
about
and
and
point
to.
A
Yeah
repo
is
one
thing
I
think
you
were
also
also
asking
about
how
we
can
discuss
this,
whether
slack
or
email,
so.
B
D
A
Last
time,
slack
also
helped
me
a
lot
personally
whenever
I
needed
to
find
out
what
all
work
items
are
remaining
where
I
should
work.
I
used
to
refer
to
that
slack
list
of
points,
and
then
it
helped
me
a
lot.
B
A
Yeah
thomas
one
thing
once
we
based
on
based
on
our
inputs
once
we
break
down
into
smaller
tasks,
one
thing
I
missed
in
slack
was
suppose
one
task
is
there
and
I
still
find
it
quite
broad
and
I
want
to
narrow
it
down
further.
A
I
can't
add
any
more
tasks
to
the
pinned
item.
So
is
there
any
other
way
which
we
can
use.
C
The
trello
boards
might
be
a
better
way
to
do
that,
because
the
trello
boards
have
a
built-in
list
function
and
breakdown
thing
that
that
has
served
fairly
well
for
some
of
the
work
that
we've
gotten
done
over
the
past
six
months.
C
I
know
it
doesn't
easily
integrate
with
other
things
you
have
to
go
to
trello.
You
know
it
is
pinned
to
general,
so
the
general
chat
channel
has
the
trello
boards
pinned
to
the
top,
or
it's
actually
in
the
description
of
the
of
the
channel,
but
for
for
breaking
things
down
and
adding
lots
of
granularity
to
tasks.
Trello.
Isn't
that
isn't
bad.
A
A
Right
and
one
more
thing,
thomas,
I
I
can
read
about
gsc,
it's
general:
it
will
be
generally
available
on.
I
can
search
on
google
about
specifics
for
receiver,
the
first
stage
of
receiver
about
algorithm.
I
need
some
technical
papers
or,
if
you
can
guide
me
where
I
can
go
through.
B
Yeah
yep,
certainly
I'll
cause
everybody
started
looking
into
it
a
bit
I'll,
create
a
repo
then
and
then
I'll
start
putting
stuff
there
and
I'll.
Send
you
a
link.
Okay
yeah.
Do
that.
C
Yeah
and
I
have
there's
one
particular
paper
that
I
keep
going
back
to
for
receive
for
dbb,
s2
and
I'll
it's
in
our
repo,
but
it's
kind
of
buried
in
the
giant
pile
of
documents
and
I'll
make
sure
that
that
particular
one
is
highlighted
in
in
the
fpga
channel.
It's
it's
helped
me
get
oriented
and
I'm
almost
completely
sure
that
thomas
already
knows
about
this
paper
and
it's
one
of
one
of
the
ones
that
he's
probably
bookmarked.
C
So
there's
I'm
very
much
looking
forward
to
to
any
to
helping
with
any
sort
of
technical
paper
accrual
and
looking
very
much
looking
forward
to
what
thomas
recommends.
A
And
anything
from
science
director
also
michelle
anything
from
where
science
direct
there
are
lots
of
paper
now
under.
C
Oh
yeah,
I
don't
know,
but
if
you,
if
you
give
me
a
list,
I
can,
I
can
go,
do
my
very
best
to
find
the
resources.
A
So
yeah
we
have
a
path
forward,
tom
anything
from
your
side.
B
No,
I'm
happy,
I'm
happy.
Well,
certainly
the
the
python
stuff
I
can
start
drive
drafting
what's
already
in
my
head,
so
I
can.
I
can
do
that
part.
Certainly.
A
Gsc
and
other
work
in
transmitter.
I
can
take
ownership
of
that.
C
A
And
those
what
I'm
thinking
is
I
can
prepare
based
on
the
like
for
gsc
and
the
change
that's
needed
in
transmitter.
I
can
prepare
a
rfc
email
and
then
send
it
a
crossword
discussion
will
that
work
for
you.
C
No
I'm
just
super
excited.
This
is
amazing
work
and
it's
starting
to
it.
Made
waves
from
the
beginning.
There's
been
lots
of
positive
feedback,
some
negative
feedback
from
grumpy
people
that
don't
like
fpgas,
and
then
they
have
opinions
and
and
yeah.
C
I
thought
that
the
the
point
about,
because
when
I
asked
ancho
and
during
this
presentation,
if
you
had
to
do
it
all
over
again,
you
know,
would
you
do
it
differently
and
he
says
well,
you
know
maybe
use
a
general
pro
processor,
and
that
brings
up
this
amazingly
accurate
thing
about
fpgas
versus
asics
versus
gpus
versus
general
purpose
processors,
that
it's
always
this
weird
balancing
act.
It's
it's!
C
You
know
that
that
you,
you
have
a
hugely
successful
thing
when
you,
when
you
hit
the
right
technology
at
the
right
time
with
the
right
code-
and
you
know
this-
the
ldpc
and
the
other
dbb
s2
stuff
really
fit
very
well
in
fpga.
However,
we
have
access
to
such
powerful
general
purpose
processors,
and
it
is
true
that
the
population
of
developers
and
users
in
like
c
and
c
plus,
is
substantially
larger.
C
So
I
thought
that
was
a
very
interesting
response
and,
and
it's
it's
it
did
not
go
unnoticed
or
anything
like
that,
and
we
do
have
a
code
base
in
in
c
from
ahmet
and
on
who
who
wrote
stuff
and
and
so
we
we
do,
try
to
kind
of
keep
this
three-legged
stool
going
and
to
look
and
see
if
there
is
a
breakthrough,
that's
happening
in
in
various
areas,
but
but
I
thought
that
was
a
very
interesting
point
and
I
thought
that
it
was
very
good
to
to
present
it.
C
You
know
in
a
forum
like
that
and
then
the
gpu
side.
We
do
actually
have
an
opportunity
here
to
take
the
gpu
code
from
charles
brain
and
run
with
it
and
we're
looking
at
that
very
very
closely
and
trying
to
see
what
we
can
do
to
to
get
some
funding
and
some
some
publishing
and
development.
For
for
that.
C
Once
you
get
it
up
to
a
point
where,
where
you
can
leverage
the
the
expense
and
the
overhead
of
the
hardware-
and
I
think
that
we're
there
that
this
is
really
is
the
right
path
and
that
we're
we're
going
to
produce
something
of
great
value,
all
right
I'll
get
to
work,
and
thank
you,
everybody
this
was
was
really
good.
Thank
you
very
much
to
anshul
for
organizing
this.