xmn has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
chainsawbike has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
chainsawbike has joined #neo900
mirage335 has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
mirage335 has joined #neo900
chainsawbike has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
chainsawbike has joined #neo900
pagurus has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
pagurus has joined #neo900
neo900 has joined #neo900
Joerg-Neo900 is now known as Guest42835
neo900 is now known as Joerg-Neo900
DocScrutinizer05 has quit [Disconnected by services]
DocScrutinizer05 has joined #neo900
DocScrutinizer05 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Joerg-Neo900 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
neo900 has joined #neo900
neo900 is now known as Joerg-Neo900
DocScrutinizer05 has joined #neo900
arcean has joined #neo900
<Joerg-Neo900>
jale42: thanks a lot! anyway this confirms what I said: issues only happen when we have both outer and center BGA balls, which isn't the case between CPU and RAM PoP. Nikolaus says the problem is on lower interface (to PCB) which is not *exactly* related to the chip being a PoP stack. The reasons may be multiple, incl too steep chill temperature profiles, too low preheating, but also too much solderpaste or flux, as well as population of PCB on
<Joerg-Neo900>
opposite PCB side
<Joerg-Neo900>
I *suspect* it's more like the PCB that warps here
ecloud is now known as ecloud_wfh
paulk-collins has joined #neo900
illwieckz has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
illwieckz has joined #neo900
galiven has joined #neo900
galiven__ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<enyc>
Joerg-Neo900: fixable?
<Joerg-Neo900>
enyc: I don't know what exactly is the cause of the problems Nikolaus encountered. I think they *must* be fixable since a few dozen millions of devices with OMAP3 had been built successfully. I still fail to see how the RAM PoP chip (Micron or non-Micron) *on top* of the OMAP makes a difference for soldering the *bottom* of OMAP to the PCB
cc___ has joined #neo900
<Joerg-Neo900>
I suspect the issues are with PCB material and with component population on opposite PCB side of the OMAP
<Joerg-Neo900>
or simply with such trivial things like amount of applied solder paste etc
<enyc>
nods
<enyc>
Joerg-Neo900: hows the PCB layout issues for v2 // enough info on this to make a new newspost?
<enyc>
need to make enough connections to gent the right input somewhere
<Joerg-Neo900>
I just a few minutes ago discussed with ceene about having a "hackaton" this weekend
<Joerg-Neo900>
please rephrase your last post!
<enyc>
we need to make enough people-connections to get the right help // input on theese issues, somehow!
<Joerg-Neo900>
yes
<enyc>
Joerg-Neo900: i've not seen akycha or whovere-it-was in this channel etc...
<enyc>
Joerg-Neo900: r.e. PCB layout etc.... aiui lots of tool development was needed!
<Joerg-Neo900>
she's here, but not posting
<Joerg-Neo900>
(tool development) we're switching from eagle to kicad plus tools wpwrak (and me) developed
<enyc>
whats' eagle still doing? any specific blockers to not needing it at all?
<Joerg-Neo900>
we have the exact position of some mechanical components like card holders and switches defined in eagle. We need to port this to the layout now and make sure it's correct to the <0.1mm while we use a new refined PCB shape
<enyc>
I understand the fiddlyness, had lots of fun hacking things together myself, not in cad, just physical layouts/protos
<enyc>
complex 3d tetris type thing ;p
<Joerg-Neo900>
here we need to make sure e.g. pushbutton switches are exactly right distance from opposite side of case (which is where the PCB is held by case) so pushing down the button actually operates the switch
<enyc>
is anybody lese using these new tools // made any protos with them?
<Joerg-Neo900>
it's a matter of 0.1mm or less, between always-pressed and doesn't-work-at-all
<enyc>
if you have reached something of a 'stable' point in eeshow (at least, not much changing at the moment), but fixed real issues since 20161102 version, may be worth contacting that maintainer and suggestiing it be updated for now...
<enyc>
and ask if it can go into 'unstable' and then 'squeeze-backports' ...
<enyc>
err stretch
<Joerg-Neo900>
I don't know which changes since 20161102
<Joerg-Neo900>
anyway it feels rather stable to me
<Joerg-Neo900>
an extremely convenient tool
<Joerg-Neo900>
I joked that we should sell it under brand name "Neo900 eeshow" ;-)
<Joerg-Neo900>
in the domain it's made for (showing schematics and differences between schematics versions) it beats everything else I've seen so far, hands down
<enyc>
gin suggestios werner commited many fixes in december
<Joerg-Neo900>
possible, yes
<enyc>
so ask the package maintainer to update, and ask about getting from experimental to unstable?
<enyc>
yes. are you using that updated version successfully?
<Joerg-Neo900>
yes
<Joerg-Neo900>
actually I guess all the updates were due to my bitching ;-)
<enyc>
ok fine
<enyc>
so thats enough to say in good faith to the DD W. Martin Borgert <debacle@debian.org> that this is now working, thank them for sponsoring eeshow into debian, can they update to latest fixed version, and let us know what will help to get it from 'experimental' into 'unstable' ?
<Joerg-Neo900>
just one nasty caveat: -N n limit history to n revisions (unlimited if omitted or 0)
<Joerg-Neo900>
yes
<Joerg-Neo900>
(caveat) I'd really prefer that default to be maybe 50 instead of 'unlimited'
<enyc>
Joerg-Neo900: so commit that change, then write to DD ?
<Joerg-Neo900>
'unlimited' causes my system to freeze from RAM starvation, on neo900 git
<Joerg-Neo900>
please go ahead
<Joerg-Neo900>
(caveat) IOW make sure you never run eeshow without explicit limit set by providing -N paramter
<Joerg-Neo900>
in Neo900 DE we deal with that via make
<Joerg-Neo900>
werner didn't like the idea to change the default to e.g. 30 in eeshow, don't know why
ossguy has joined #neo900
<enyc>
Joerg-Neo900: i'm not in the neo900 fit or otheriwse, i could later set this up, but might be better if somebody already in-the-system just put in the change and emailed the DD ?