
FPGA vendor Lattice acknowledges value of open source community - andyjpb
https://ossg.bcs.org/blog/2020/06/28/fpga-vendor-lattice-acknowledges-value-of-open-source-community/
======
kiwidrew
What I'd really like to see is another manufacturer launching an FPGA that
uses the same bitstream format (and hence the same general architecture) as
the iCE40 or ECP5 series.

Then we'd have a proper open platform! Remember the "good old days" when chips
were second-sourced? (And third- and fourth- sourced for the really popular
ones: Intel's 8086/8088 come to mind here.)

------
Rochus
Well, why don't they disclose the bitstream format then? This would save the
open source community a lot of work that could be used elsewhere.

~~~
jacoblambda
NDAs and Patent issues are number one in this. It's the same reason AMD can't
open source their platform security processor and why it took so long for AMD
to start being able to contribute to open source Linux drivers.

Going through and open sourcing any part of a modern piece of silicon or the
software interfacing with it is a miserable process. Basically everything has
to get arduously churned through legal to verify that it doesn't expose the
company to any risks.

Unfortunately that open sourcing process is largely thankless work and as a
result, companies either never make the leap or end up dissuaded during the
multi-year process of clearing the "to be open-sourced" code through legal.

~~~
Rochus
Thanks. Your last paragraph is the main argument from my point of view.

Without corresponding court cases, the assessment by the legal services is
only based on best effort anyway. They therefore do not want to let themselves
out on the branches and tend to come to conservative assessments. And they
already have enough work to do and the importance for the firm is also
limited, which explains the long processing time well.

