The C7x compiler ships in the BeagleBone AI-64 Debian image and there are a number of documents available from TI regarding C7x programming:
Still, I’ve encountered multiple times the impression that the C7x+MMA is not very documented for programming. Even I had this impression before going to take a look at what is out there. Without having a direct need to do so, I don’t have any real direct experience.
For people that monitor this forum, how important is it for us to push TI for improvements?
- Without additional C7x+MMA programming details, I won’t use BeagleBone AI-64
- Having additional C7x+MMA programming details would result in me investing heavily in developing on BeagleBone AI-64
- I’d feel better about using BeagleBone AI-64 if additional C7x+MMA programming information was more detailed.
- I don’t care about C7x+MMA programming. Either I won’t use C7x+MMA, or the C and Python programming options with TensorFlow Lite, ONNX and Neo-DLR today, are enough for my BeagleBone AI-64 programming needs.
- I don’t know what you are talking about.
yes it’s got two DSP’s in chip … I’m new to what a DSP is and can do, i’m just a hobby user.
It was a decision factor in my purchase, I reasoned it possibly could do DAC and it’s reverse or possibly even try Lidar/Radar stuff with the right input kit. Seems that my assumption that with a community around the board it would have documentation for this was in error for th e most part. I have looked at what little there was from TI and it was … well above my current understanding.
Without some bridge documentation and examples to show the basic use and accessing the SoC DSP chips programmatically, then I may have to drop the bbai64 for something that is better documented to explore DSP and it’s potential uses.
Without some bridge documentation and examples to show the basic use and accessing the SoC DSP
Its a funny situation. Beagle is IMHO a 10x better board than the PI and far more suitable as a base for prototyping on with the goal of eventually releasing a product around. Having said that, the PI wins the hearts and minds because they have documentation that fits the hobbyist market.
I think TI should hire a full-time person who would be something like a “community documentation specialist”. Their goal would be to take the copious amounts of excellent engineering documentation and pare that down into bite-sized pieces to ease new developers into the ecosystem. Such an investment by TI would pay dividends because it only takes 1 or 2 successful products to be based around TI platform to pay for the cost of that salary. As most of us know, a successful product can be produced for 10 years or more…and TIs goal should be in helping those heretofore nascent developers get up to speed on the platform as quickly as possible.
Thankfully we have an excellent community in @jkridner @RobertCNelson and all the other helpful posters that frequent this place.