Talk:Reconfigurable computing

message: The reason why one should not change reconfigurable computing to reconfigurable system is to understand what exactly reconfigurable computing addresses. To baseline; a computer system is defined as an organised collection of hardware and software components designed to manipulate data in a ''meaningful'' manner. An abstract way to model such computer systems is to use a method called computer system model (CSM). CSM is composed of three architecture types providing clear abstraction level views to a computer system. These architecture types are known as computer architecture (CA) which is everything to do with the CPU, implementation architecture (IA) which is everything to do with the platform and software architecture (SA) also known as system architecture and deals with the software domain of a computer system.
Computer Architecture addresses the organisation and design of the CPU, a basic CPU is composed of two domains which are; Control Path and Data Path.  However, these two domains are heavily influenced by the computational configuration adopted. There are two computation configurations which are; Temporal –compute in time and Spatial –compute in space. Examples of temporal solutions would be; Pentium, Opteron, Xeon, Itanium, Power and SPARC. And examples of spatial would be ASICs. 
Without delving deep into CPU design a short synopsis would be; CPUs that use a temporal configuration generally has a large control path over the data path. As an example the Itanium McKinley has a control path of ~71% and a data path of ~7.4% the remaining area is used for miscellaneous circuitry. Whereas an ASIC, the ideal spatial solution will use ~80% data path and 15% control path. Spatial solutions like ASICs offer greater performance/watt/cycle than there temporal solutions, which, temporal solutions counteract this by offering better application flexibility through programmability.
Reconfigurable Computing (RC) introduces a third type of computation configuration which is a mix between temporal and spatial. How the blend of this mix is done depends on the innovation of the RC. As I described earlier computational configuration influences the CA’s control and data paths, and RC is a new form of computational configuration thus, RC is not a computer system it is in fact an architectural form of CA. Which means the best suited name is Reconfigurable Computing and not Reconfigurable System.
User:Lucid57 21:43, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Reconfigurable Computing" vs "Reconfigurable System"

message: I converted the terminology into a table and moved it into the near bottom. Having it as sections made it hard to get an overview of the article. BTW, this is the first time I've seen an article have a whole terminology listing, is it really needed or could we link to relevant terms instead? Henrik 20:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: 1. The paper talks about "Estrin" hybrid computers. As far as I am aware this is not a commonly used term in reconfigurable computing. I would recommend it is not used unless anyone can provide proof that it is a current and widespread term. 
2. Too much marketing material is reproduced here in relation to SRC and Mitrionics. There are a lot of players in this market, loads will die off and loads more will emerge. This article should be futureproofed by toning the down the constant references to current market players. It will also lessen the temptation for the market players themselves to increase the amount they're referred to in this article.
3. Only one author has ever used the term "Reconfigurable Computing Paradox", so it seems like it shouldn't be used here until it gains more currency in the greater research community. 
Generally the article is not in a good shape. I think we need to start discussing a new plan for a total rewrite of this article. 
82.46.67.130 17:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with the Article 

message: http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9906/15/supercomp.idg/
Back in 1999, Starbridge Systems claimed it would have a $1,000 supercomputer for sale within 18 months, and that it would be 60,000 times as fast as a 350 MHz Pentium 2.
What happened? It's been nearly a decade and still no $1,000 supercomputer. Emails to the company haven't been answered.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.67.35.214 (talk) 10:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  $1,000 Supercomputer? 

message: The terms "flowware" and "configware" are not standard within the field. This is pure self-promotion from Reiner Hartenstein and company. I witnessed him at a conference arguing with other researchers to try to force his terminology, which is rather outdated and meaningless. Just follow the link to Reiner Hartenstein and you will see that there is an excessively long page for someone with only minor notability. Compare this with other academics of similar importance. I think this article should be cleaned up to reflect the consensus of the reconfigurable computing researchers and not of one man.
208.191.58.164 (talk) 12:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology and Self-Promotion 

message: "[...]a solution where a softcore activates critical application-specific instructions
that are coded in a hardware definition language in the same chip can be a very efficient
solution in some cases. An even more powerful solution is the combination of a dedicated
microprocessor core and an FPGA in the same chip. Such hybrid solutions are now used in
some embedded systems."   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parallelized (talk • contribs) 09:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  FPGA-based programmable, on demand co-processors 

message: Hello, I'm working for the So-logic company, located in Vienna, Austria, www.so-logic.net. We have developed the FPGA Database application, www.so-logic.net/en/fpga/table/producers. It is the directory of all FPGA families that have ever existed on the market. It is free of charge and available to everyone. We would like to add the link to our database in the Wikipedia external links on this page. Thank you for your time. --Maja Gordic (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the link should be added. It is not our practice to add links to vendor sites or lists of vendors. See WP:EL for more details on what should and should not be linked. - MrOllie (talk) 15:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

text: I certainly do not think that the link belongs in this article - a device list does not enhance the readers understanding of this topic. If anything, it belongs in the FPGA article, but even that is up for discussion (for better or worse, the discussion is actually taking place here: Talk:Xilinx/Archives/2011#External_link). —Mrand Talk • C 16:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link 

message: For reference and to wp:preserve, there has been a big removal of content at
this revision. Users interested in the topic may find it useful, and knowledgeable editors may want to review that some of it can be sourced and included back in the article. Diego (talk) 10:09, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like someone else who maybe knows something about the subject to check the removals there. I got alerted by a link to a porn site (I translated it) and multiple links in the same paragraph to a website. I googled blocks of text and found the exact same content on many different sites, as if someone were trying to do a ...what... google bomb or something. It was also lacking sources.  Be——Critical 20:25, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No valid reason given for major blanking. Adding most of the content back. Although I have deleted some portions to wikify the content. Agreed it was a mess. Didn't have to be completely deleted though. Wonderfl (reply) 10:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preserve major blanking 

message: Apparently you are feeding the block RAM with 8 different addresses sources . Now how is that going to work? Ebaychatter0 (talk) 05:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  I see problem with that BRAM implementation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Reconfigurable computing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150109003009/http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Articles/Miscellaneous/RISC.pdf to http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Articles/Miscellaneous/RISC.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified