On Jan 13, 2008 6:42 AM, David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 02:30 -0500, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > David Woodhouse writes: > > > > > http://www.csr.com/products/unifirange.htm > > > > They claim that that is a 1-chip solution. Is it really? > > I have no reason to believe otherwise -- why do you ask?
There have been claims that Marvell's solution is especially well-suited to the XO because it includes a processor. I can still count the chips though, and Marvell is using 2. That makes them no better than a 1-chip solution without a processor, because one can just add a processor to a softmac 1-chip solution. I am glad that the Marvell stuff is on USB, where it can not DMA right over the kernel. :-) > Fewer chips is generally better. If we could put the _whole_ thing on > one die -- the kind of thing IBM are really good at doing for their > customers -- then that would be ideal. I don't think we're quite going > to manage _that_ level of integration, but we could certainly do better > than we have in the current XO design. Being a tad less aggressive: CaFE, D-CON, and a PPC4xx to turn a softmac wireless chip into fullmac. _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
