UPGRADE YOUR BROWSER

We have detected your current browser version is not the latest one. Xilinx.com uses the latest web technologies to bring you the best online experience possible. Please upgrade to a Xilinx.com supported browser:Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer 11, Safari. Thank you!

Reply

Benefits with PetaLinux

Accepted Solution Solved
Visitor
Posts: 13
Registered: ‎02-11-2015
Accepted Solution

Benefits with PetaLinux

Hi,

 

I'm new to the Zynq world, and want to do some research before I start working with Zynq boards. I like the idea that one can run an operating system (PetaLinux) beside the FPGA, but I can't really understand why one would do that? Isn't FPGA the best choice when it comes to performance and technology. 

The reasons I can think of is:

- Less power consumption

- Less complexity because one can create appliations in C/C++

 

But are there other important differenses other than these?

 

--S.A

 


Accepted Solutions
Scholar
Posts: 514
Registered: ‎10-26-2012

Re: Benefits with PetaLinux

[ Edited ]

You would use an Operating System on the Zynq for the same reasons you use one on your PC or smartphone. Mostly to be able to run applications on it.

 

As for performance, well, in general, your application will run as fast as the hardware allows. You'll get 25MB/s on the Zynq's SD card interface, regardless of whether you do this in Linux, Windows or bare metal. Heavy number crunching will be limited only by CPU speed. A 16-channel 160-tap FIR filter will process just as many samples per second regardless of whether you're doing that in Linux or bare metal.

 

An simple way to think of this is this: The (Linux) kernel is a bare metal application.

 

As for FPGA versus CPU, well, there are some things that you just won't be able to do using the FPGA. The first thing that came to my (twisted) mind is building bitstreams. The FPGA is incapable of building bitstreams for itself. The CPU though is able to both compile for itself as well as for other CPUs. The CPU is even capable of building bitstreams for the FPGA, but the FPGA would suck at compiling code for the CPU even if it were able to do so. But that FIR filter I mentioned would run like greased lightning on the FPGA, provided you assign enough resources (DSP slices in this case) to it.

View solution in original post


All Replies
Moderator
Posts: 3,046
Registered: ‎10-24-2013

Re: Benefits with PetaLinux

Hi,
Check this link
http://www.xilinx.com/tools/petalinux-sdk.htm
Thanks,Vijay
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please mark the post as an answer "Accept as solution" in case it helped resolve your query.
Give kudos in case a post in case it guided to the solution.
Scholar
Posts: 1,596
Registered: ‎09-05-2011

Re: Benefits with PetaLinux

Linux is used in different sectors such as Automotive, Aerospace, Industrial & Medical etc.

Generally users use Linux when they need access to OS services such as security, Networking, Graphics, multimedia etc. Since Linux is open source and has a big active developer community, it is a popular choice among the developers.

Baremetal (Standalone) applications are in fact faster than Linux applications because they do not need any system calls (user space to kernel space).

Essentially it comes down to whether your application will need these services provided by Linux or any other OS. If yes, use them. if not, stick to standalone applications.
Scholar
Posts: 514
Registered: ‎10-26-2012

Re: Benefits with PetaLinux

[ Edited ]

You would use an Operating System on the Zynq for the same reasons you use one on your PC or smartphone. Mostly to be able to run applications on it.

 

As for performance, well, in general, your application will run as fast as the hardware allows. You'll get 25MB/s on the Zynq's SD card interface, regardless of whether you do this in Linux, Windows or bare metal. Heavy number crunching will be limited only by CPU speed. A 16-channel 160-tap FIR filter will process just as many samples per second regardless of whether you're doing that in Linux or bare metal.

 

An simple way to think of this is this: The (Linux) kernel is a bare metal application.

 

As for FPGA versus CPU, well, there are some things that you just won't be able to do using the FPGA. The first thing that came to my (twisted) mind is building bitstreams. The FPGA is incapable of building bitstreams for itself. The CPU though is able to both compile for itself as well as for other CPUs. The CPU is even capable of building bitstreams for the FPGA, but the FPGA would suck at compiling code for the CPU even if it were able to do so. But that FIR filter I mentioned would run like greased lightning on the FPGA, provided you assign enough resources (DSP slices in this case) to it.