On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Werner Almesberger <[email protected]
> wrote:

> I only found relatively minor things.
> Adam, congratulations are in order again :-)
>

quite a lot though :)


> - POWER (and few other places): resistor tolerances are not always
>  indicated. Several resistor values look like 1%. It would be good
>  to explicitly state this. (Unless we make 1% our default
>  tolerance.)
>

applied and noted 1% is default in Power.sch


>
> - POWER (R62): I think 0.1W will be sufficient :-)
>

fixed.


>
> - FPGA_BANK0 (near U22A): VGA_SCL is labeled as input to the FPGA.
>

fixed, global lables are changed to bidirectional.


> - NOR_FLASH (U9, pin 43): according to the data sheet, it should
>  be labeled VCCQ, not VCC. The AD schematics are correct.
>

fixed.


>
> - AUDIO (MK1): do we want to put a part number (MCE-100, it seems)
>  in the schematics ?
>
>
It was invisible. but now I deleted.


> - AUDIO (near AC97_SYNC): seems that TP6, TP7, and TP8 were lost
>  in translation.
>

fixed.


>
> - VideoIn (C211): 10nF should be just 10n
>

fixed on C221.


>
> - USBExtPorts1 (U16, U17, etc.): you changed pin name VIF to
>  VIN. Was this intentional ?
>

fixed. i typed wrong when enabled text instead of using pin name.


> Text/comments:
>
> - DRAM (C157... and C162...): since you mention for C240...  and
>  C248... what they are used for, maybe you want to do the same
>  for the other two groups of caps as well ?
>

applied text for mention.


>
> - MiscControl (J7, J8): in the AD schematics, you mention which
>  DMX port is RX and which is TX. I think it would be nice to
>  have this here, too.
>

fixed.


>
> - MiscControl (J9, J10): here, it would be useful if the numbers
>  of the pins on the connector would be indicated, like you did
>  on the DMX connectors, since the connector pin numbering
>  doesn't follow the symbol/footprint numbering.
>

applied texts of number.


>
>  Alternatively, maybe just change the order of the pins in the
>  symbol, e.g., 4-5-3-2-1 instead of 3-5-2-4-1, which seems a
>  little weird anyway.
>

keep the same order with front-viewing. :)


>
> - MISC (D3): typo in the LED name. Should be D23.
>

fixed.


>
> Style:
>
> - POWER (TP34): it's very well hidde. How about separating it
>  from J11, similar to the POWERED-GND subcircuit in the lower
>  left corner ?
>

applied.


>
> - Header4: AUDIO (J23, J25, ...), MISC (J5): it's a bit ugly to
>  have the pin numbers twice, so I would set number or name to
>  invisible.
>

applied and set pin name invisible.


>
> - VideoIn (near V5...V7, R151...153): there we have cross-style
>  junctions. Maybe move GND under V5 and R151, similar to the
>  way you've done it with C208...C211, etc.
>

fixed.


>
> - VideoIn (near U21 pin 46): there seems to be enough space that
>  you could avoid the "hook".
>

applied.


>
> - VideoIn (near U21 pin 32): this "hook" looks particularly ugly.
>  Maybe make the ground point straight down and left-justify
>  the VIDEOIN_AGND text ?
>

applied.


>
> - MiscControl (U6): the squiggle on the LED looks weird. Real
>  arrows or half-arrows (like on the LEDs) would be better.
>
>
fixed.


> - USBExtPorts1 (C257...C260): did you notice that, if you swapped
>  the two capacitor groups, you could avoid crossing the wires
>  twice between U26 and J16.
>

applied.


>
>  Similar with USBExtPorts1 and the AD schematics.
>

will change this in AD schematics too.

- FPGA_BANK2 (R161): the text (component reference and value) is
>  further away from the symbol than usual
>

fixed.


>
> - AUDIO (near V24): the text is very close to AUDIO_AGND and
>  also the two text lines touch each other.
>

applied also fixed cross-style junctions.


> - VideoIn (text under C208, C215): text touches the junctions
>

applied.


>
> - USBExtPorts1 (text under V3 and U26), USBExtPorts2 (V10, U29),
>  USBIntPorts (V22): the text lines touch each other
>

fixed.


>
> - MISC (under the LED matrix): text lines touch each other
>

fixed.


>
> Backport:
>
> - U22 is called XC6SLX45-2FGG484C in the KiCad schematics but
>  XC6SLX45-FGG484C in the AD schematics. It seems that the KiCad
>  schematics are more accurate in this case. Shouldn't the AD
>  schematics be updated, too ?
>

Sure, I noted few changes to be done for AD schematics after routes.
http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Milkymist_One_Schematic_Change_History#To_be_changed


>
> Curiosity:
>
> - DRAM (C245): the C240...C245 group has 5 caps while C248...C252
>  has only 4. Why that difference ?
>
>
see here:
http://lists.milkymist.org/htdig.cgi/devel-milkymist.org/2010-October/000952.html
http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Milkymist_One_RC2_Layout_History#20101028


> We also have a few cases of wires carrying negated signals still
> being called something_N in labels, e.g., ETH_INT_N. Not sure if
> you want to unify them now or if you prefer staying with the old
> names.
>

changed to nETH_INT, also for expression of differential signal called
foo_P /or foo_N; which keeps same way as you mentioned in #milkymist

thanks,
- adam
_______________________________________________
http://lists.milkymist.org/listinfo.cgi/devel-milkymist.org
IRC: #milkymist@Freenode

Reply via email to