How to reduce the capacity of RedHawk Python library - redhawksdr

There are many RedHawk Python 2.7 libraries, and the capacity including Linux is getting bigger. Can RedHawk remove unnecessary Python 2.7 library module to reduce the capacity? Please let me know if there is a module available for deletion. Or, I am currently creating an image by compressing the whole system with gzip, but is there a more efficient compression method?

What is it you are trying to accomplish? If file size is that important it sounds like you are working on an embedded platform with limited disk space. Check out the features and work here on openembedded-hawk. It's been a while since I've updated it but you can have the entire REDHAWK framework built, with or without python, a REDHAWK Application, and the entire linux based OS all under 100 MiB. (Slightly more if you include python)

Related

How to minimize the Python 3.6 runtime for an embedded system?

We make an ARM 9 embedded system, Linux, etc. Recently a customer asked we pre-install Python 3 for them. We worked out the cross-compile (QEMU is really magical), but the resultant build is 177Mb, so that's a no go. What's the best plan here - we can leave off the Doc directory, and maybe the "build" dir? I see the Lib directory is 54Mb - is it a case of picking an choosing what libs the customer needs? We know very little about Python. To be clear, I see lots of advice about packaging Python apps - that's not what we are doing - we are packaging the Python runtime. Thanks! (directory size summary below)
1.6M ./Python-3.6.0/Mac
760K ./Python-3.6.0/Include
17M ./Python-3.6.0/build
5.4M ./Python-3.6.0/Python
8.0K ./Python-3.6.0/.github
54M ./Python-3.6.0/Lib
2.7M ./Python-3.6.0/PC
2.7M ./Python-3.6.0/Tools
6.9M ./Python-3.6.0/Objects
11M ./Python-3.6.0/Doc
824K ./Python-3.6.0/Parser
20M ./Python-3.6.0/Modules
15M ./Python-3.6.0/Programs
620K ./Python-3.6.0/PCbuild
12K ./Python-3.6.0/Grammar
5.8M ./Python-3.6.0/Misc
161M ./Python-3.6.0
177M .
A possible choice to meet your requirements may be MicroPython which is an implementation of PYthon 3 which consists of a small subset of the Python standard library. According to their website it is targeted for micro controllers and constrained environments:
https://micropython.org/
According to their description MicroPython aims to be as compatible with normal Python as possible to allow you to transfer code with ease from the desktop to a microcontroller or embedded system. Yet it is compact enough to fit and run within just 256k of code space and 16k of RAM.
There is an online project that puts an implementation of MicroPyton in an Arm Cortex M4 based embeeded system may also prove helpful:
https://github.com/micropython/micropython/wiki
We removed the following:
python3-tests
libpython3.8-staticdev
python3-*src
python3-*dbg
python3-*dev
All the .pyc files (they can be recompiled after install)
We chose not to go ahead with the following:
Removing "unneeded" modules: may break the dependencies of 3rd party libraries
UPX binary packer: the zipped installation media is the same size, so this only slows down startup
python source file minification: produced broken code, as we found out when regenerating the .pyc with python3 -m compileall .

The compressing speed of libjpeg-turbo has no difference with libjpeg in my program

My program runs on the android device, and the device is ARM system with NEON supported.
At first I used libjpeg to compress the RGB image(800*480) to jpeg. The speed was about 70ms for per image, but it was too slow for me. Later I found the libjpeg-turbo, seems it can improve the compressing speed with the NEON in ARM.
But after compiling and testing, I found their compressing speed almost the same. And the change of the quality and flag passed to tjCompress2 also took no effect. I have no idea whether something is wrong or something is missing in my program. Codes below :
tjhandle _jpegCompressor = tjInitCompress();
tjCompress2(_jpegCompressor, (unsigned char*)in, PARAM_WIDTH,
PARAM_WIDTH*PERSIZE, PARAM_HEIGHT, PERSIZE,
(unsigned char**)&out, (long unsigned int*)outlen, TJSAMP_444, 100,
TJFLAG_FASTDCT);
tjDestroy(_jpegCompressor);
The jpeg buffer(out) is allocated and freed by myself.
The version of libjpeg-turbo I use is 1.4.2
Many of the SIMD acceleration for libjpeg-turbo was only added in 2.1 (currently newest). On my MacBook M1 (ARM with Neon), libjpeg-turbo 2.1.0 is significantly faster both in compression and decompression than libjpeg 9e.
On libjpeg-turbo official site, you can find a table of SIMD coverage for components of JPEG compression and various architecture and in which version the accelerated code was added.
Based on experiment I carried out recently, the outputs of compression and decompression using libjpeg-turbo are identical backwards all the way to libjpeg 6b. Good job, libjpeg-turbo developers!
As far as I know libjpeg-turbo has SIMD, SSE2, MMX instructions for x86 processor. I've looked at some of the assembly code and I didn't see any code for other types of CPU architectures.
I'm surprised it even worked. I think that it (the library) preserves the original code, that would explain why it was able to even run.
If you're looking for optimizations, you may want to look at optimizations you can do with the libjpeg itself. There are several documentation files, one specifically has instructions for optimizing on the ARM processor. You can also tweak the memory manager. You'll find a lot more information there, than what I can type here.

Can Xilinx ISE iMPACT write an SVF to a PicoBlaze like Adept can?

I'm midway through a VHDL class and have been able to play relatively nice with the ISE and Digilent toolchain in Linux... until trying to reflash a PicoBlaze program. For details, I am currently running and targeting,
Fedora 21 64-bit (3.19.3-200.fc21.x86_64)
Nexys2 development board from Digilent (with a Spartan3)
Xilinx ISE 14.7
Adept 2.16.1 Runtime
Adept 2.2.1 Utilities
I've been able to run ISE and program the Nexys2 bit files with iMPACT just fine so far in Linux, but this current project is to write an assembly program for the PicoBlaze soft core processor, compile and update the memory of the running vector without having to resynthesize any VHDL.
Using the steps from Kris Chaplin's post, I can compile a PSM to HEX and then convert that HEX file to an SVF in dosbox. From here I can use Digilent's Adept tool in Windows to program a top_level.bit file which has the PicoBlaze already synthesized, I could also do this in ISE's iMPACT in Linux. After the design is running, I can use Adept to program the SVF file into the running memory of the design and everything is peachy. However, trying to load the SVF into iMPACT in Linux throws an exception,
EXCEPTION:iMPACT:SVFYacc.c:208:1.10 - Data mismatch.
The only issue I've found online with that error shows that there should be an '#' symbol that needs to be removed, but I haven't seen any '#'s anywhere in the SVF.
I also tried to convert the SVF to XSVF. iMPACT doesn't throw an error loading the XSVF, but programming/executing the XSVF freezes the design instead of running the new program.
Adept doesn't have a comparable GUI in Linux that I've seen, just a cmd line tool 'djtgcfg'. Just like iMPACT, I've been able to program the toplevel.bit file fine with
$ djtgcfg prog -d Nexys2 -i 0 -f ../../toplevel.bit
but attempting to program the svf file with the same call doesn't seem to affect anything. It says it should take a few minutes and immediately reports "Programming succeeded" but I don't see any change on the device.
I'd really like to keep my environment all in Linux if I can, I don't have quite enough room on my laptop to juggle between two VMs.
Is it possible to use use iMPACT to write an SVF file to the Nexus2? Or can/should I be using the Adept utility differently?
Has anyone gotten this to work? Thanks a ton!
There are many better ways to reconfigure the PicoBlaze InstructionROM without resynthesizing:
use Xilinx's data2mem tool
This toll is shipped with ISE and can patch BlockRAM contents in bit-files
=> requires FPGA reprogramming
use PicoBlaze's embedded JTAGLoader6
Enable the embedded JTAGLoader6 design in the template file. Use JTAG_Loader_RH_64 binary or JTAG_Loader_Win7_64.exe to upload a hex-file via JTAG into the PicoBlaze ROM.
=> reconfigure ROM at runtime, no FPGA reprogramming needed
The manual from Ken Chapman offers several pages on how to use JTAG_Loader. Additionally, have a look into the PicoBlaze discussions at forums.xilinx.com. There are some discussions regarding bugs and issues around JTAG_Loader and how to solve them.
Also have a look into opbasm from Kevin Thibedeau as an alternative and improved PicoBlaze assembler. It is also shipped with an ROM patch tool.
I know it's a little bit late for the original poster, but I suspect I am taking the same class and I believe I have found a solution to upload picoblaze code on linux.
Download the KCPSM3 zip file from Xilinx IP Download, extract the contents and move the executables from the JTAG_loader folder to your working directory.
In dosbox run hex2svfsetup.exe for the nexys2 board select menu options 4 - 0 - 1 - 8
Use the assembler to create the .hex file
In dosbox run hex2svf.exe to create the svf file
Then run svf2xsvf.exe -d -i < input.svf > -o < output.xsvf >
The contrary to the JTAG_Loader_quick_guide.pdf in the initial zip file use impact and open the xsvf file and program using the xsvf file.

What are the available interactive languages that run in tiny memory? [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I am looking for general purpose programming languages that
have an interactive (live coding) prompt
work in 32 KB of RAM by itself or 8 KB when the compiler is hosted on a separate machine
run on a microcontroller with as little as 8-32 KB RAM total (without an MMU).
Below is my list so far, what am I missing?
Python: The PyMite VM needs 64K flash, 8K RAM. Targets LPC, SAM7 and ATmegas with 8K or more. Hosted.
Lua: The eLua FAQ recommends 256K flash, 64K RAM.
FORTH: amforth needs 8K flash, 150 bytes RAM, 30 bytes EEPROM on an ATmega.
Scheme: armpit Scheme The smallest target is the LPC2103 with 32K Flash, 4K SRAM.
C: Interactive C runs on 68HC11 with no flash and 32K SRAM. Hosted.
C: picoc an open source, cross-compiling, interactive C system. When compiled for AVR, it takes 63K flash, 8K RAM. The RAM could be reduced with effort to keep tables in flash.
C++: AngelScript an open source, byte-code based, C/C++ like scripting language with easy native calls.
Tcl: TinyTCL runs on DOS, 60K binary. Looks easy to port.
BASIC: TinyBasic: Initializes with a 64K heap, might be adjustable.
Lisp
PostScript: (I haven't found a FOSS implementation for low memory yet)
Shell: bitlash: An interactive command shell for Arduino (ATmega). See also AVRSH.
A homebrew Forth runtime can be implemented in very little memory indeed. I know someone who made one on a Cosmac in the 1970s. The core runtime was just 30 bytes.
I hear that CHIP-8, XPL0, PicoC, and Objective Caml have been ported to graphing calculators.
The Wikipedia "Lego Mindstorms" article lists a bunch of programming languages that allegedly run on the Lego RCX or Lego NXT platform.
Do any of them meet your "live coding" criteria?
You might want to check out the other microcontroller Forths at the Forth wiki . It lists at least 4 Forths for the Atmel AVR: amforth (which you already mention), PFAVR, avrforth, and ByteForth.
(Links to those interpreters, as well as this StackOverflow question, are included in the "Embedded Systems" wikibook).
I would recommend LUA (or eLUA http://www.eluaproject.net/ ). I've "ported" LUA to a Cortex-M3 a while back. From the top of my head it had a flash size of 60~100KB and needed about 20KB RAM to run. I did strip down to the bare essentials, but depending on your application, that might be enough. There's still room for optimization, especially about RAM requirements, but I doubt you can run it comfortable in 8KB.
Some AVR interpreters/VMs:
http://www.cqham.ru/tbcgroup/index_eng.htm
http://www.jcwolfram.de/projekte/avr/chipbasic2/main.php
http://www.jcwolfram.de/projekte/avr/chipbasic8/main.php
http://www.jcwolfram.de/projekte/avr/main.php
http://code.google.com/p/python-on-a-chip/
http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?module=Freaks%20Academy&func=viewItem&item_id=688&item_type=project
http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?module=Freaks%20Academy&func=viewItem&item_id=626&item_type=project
http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?module=Freaks%20Academy&func=viewItem&item_id=460&item_type=project
http://www.harbaum.org/till/nanovm/index.shtml
Wren fits your criteria -- by default it's configured to use just 4k of RAM. AFAIK it hasn't seen any actual use, since the guy I wrote it for decided he didn't need an interpreter running wholly on the target system after all.
The language is influenced most obviously by ML and Forth.
Have you considered a port in C of Tiny Basic? Or, perhaps rewriting the UCSD Pascal p-machine to your architecture from Z-80?
Seriously, though, JavaScript would make a good embedded scripting language, but I've no clue what the minimum memory requirements are for the VM + GC, nor how difficult to remove OS dependencies. I played with NJS a while back, which could possibly fit your needs. This one is interesting in that the compiler is written in JavaScript (self hosting).
You can take a look at very powerful AvrCo Multitasking Pascal for AVR. You can try it at http://www.e-lab.de. MEGA8/88 version is free. There are tons of drivers and simulator with JTAG debugger and nice live or simulated visualizations of all standard devices (LCDCHAR, LCDGRAPH, 7SEG, 14SEG, LEDDOT, KEYBOARD, RC5, SERVO, STEPPER...).
You're missing EmbedVM, homepage here, svn repo here. Remember to check out both [1,2] videos on the front page ;)
From the homepage:
EmbedVM is a small embeddable virtual machine for microcontrollers
with a C-like language frontend. It has been tested with GCC and AVR
microcontrollers. But as the Virtual machine is rather simple it
should be easy to port it to other architectures.
The VM simulates a 16bit CPU that can access up to 64kB of memory. It
can only operate on 16bit values and arrays of 16bit and 8bit values.
There is no support for complex data structures (struct, objects,
etc.). A function can have a maximum of 32 local variables and 32
arguments.
Besides the memory for the VM, a small structure holding the VM state
and the reasonable amount of memory the EmbedVM functions need on the
stack there are no additional memory requirements for the VM.
Especially the VM does not depend on any dymaic memory management.
EmbedVM is optimized for size and simplicity, not execution speed. The
VM itself takes up about 3kB of program memory on an AVR
microcontroller. On an AVR ATmega168 running at 16MHz the VM can
execute about 75 VM instructions per millisecond.
All memory accesses done by the VM are parformed using user callback
functions. So it is possible to have some or all of the VM memory on
external memory devices, flash memory, etc. or "memory-map" hardware
functions to the VM.
The compiler is a UNIX/Linux commandline tool that reads in a *.evm
file and generates bytecode in vaious formats (binary file, intel hex,
C array initializers and a special debug output format). It also
generates a symbol file that can be used to access data in the VM
memory from the host application.
The C-like language looks like this: http://svn.clifford.at/embedvm/trunk/examples/numberquizz/vmcode.evm
I would recommend MY-BASIC, runs with in minimum 8 KB RAM, and easy to port.
There's also JavaScript, via Espruino.
This is built specifically for Microcontrollers and there are builds for various different chips (mainly STM32s) that fit a full system into as little as 8kB RAM.
Have you considered simply using the /bin/sh supplied by busybox? Or on of the smaller scripting languages they recommend?
Prolog - http://www.gprolog.org/
According to a google search "prolog small" the size of the executable can be made quite small by avoiding linking the built-in predicates.
None of the languages in the list in the question or in the answers proved satisfactory for the requirement of super easy compilation and integration into an existing micro controller project (disclosure: I didn't actually try every single one of the suggestions).
I found instead tinyscript which is a single .c+.h file that compiled with the rest of the source files on my project with the only additional configuration required being to provide a void outchar(int c) which can be empty if you don't require output from the scripts.
For me speed of execution is far less important than ease of build and integration and interop with C, as my use case is mainly just calling some C functions in order.
I have been using in my previous work busybox on a BlackFin.
we compiled perl + php for it, after changing s/fork/vfork/g it worked pretty good... more or less. Not having an MMU is not a good idea. The memory fragmentation will kill the server pretty easily. All I did was:
for i in `seq 1 100`; do wget http://black-fin-ip/test.php; done
It died while I was walking to my boss and telling him that the server is going to die in production :)
I would suggest use python. But now the only problem is the memory overhead right? So I have great idea for people who may be stuck in this problem later on.
First thing's first, write a bf interpreter(or just get source code from somewhere). The interpreter will be really small. Also bf is a Turing complete language. Now you need to write your code in python and then transpiler it to bf using bfpy( https://github.com/felko/bfpy/blob/master/README.md ). I've given you the solution with the least overhead and I am pretty sure a bf interpreter will easily stay under 10KB of ram usage.
Erlang - http://erlang.org/
it can fit in 2MB
http://www.experts123.com/q/is-erlang-small-enough-for-embedded-systems.html

Building a custom Linux Live CD

Can anyone point me to a good tutorial on creating a bootable Linux CD from scratch?
I need help with a fairly specialized problem: my firm sells an expansion card that requires custom firmware. Currently we use an extremely old live CD image of RH7.2 that we update with current firmware. Manufacturing puts the cards in a machine, boots off the CD, the CD writes the firmware, they power off and pull the cards. Because of this cycle, it's essential that the CD boot and shut down as quickly as possible.
The problem is that with the next generation of cards, I have to update the CD to a 2.6 kernel. It's easy enough to acquire a pre-existing live CD - but those all are designed for showing off Linux on the desktop - which means they take forever to boot.
Can anyone fix me up with a current How-To?
Update:
So, just as a final update for anyone reading this later - the tool I ended up using was "livecd-creator".
My reason for choosing this tool was that it is available for RedHat-based distributions like CentOs, Fedora and RHEL - which are all distributions that my company supports already. In addition, while the project is very poorly documented it is extremely customizable. I was able to create a minimal LiveCD and edit the boot sequence so that it booted directly into the firmware updater instead of a bash shell.
The whole job would have only taken an hour or two if there had been a README explaining the configuration file!
There are a couple of interesting projects you could look into.
But first: does it have to be a CD-ROM? That's probably the slowest possible storage (well, apart from tape, maybe) you could use. What about a fast USB stick or a an IEE1394 hard-disk or maybe even an eSATA hard-disk?
Okay, there are several Live-CDs that are designed to be very small, in order to e.g. fit on a business card sized CD. Some were also designed to be booted from a USB stick, back when that meant 64-128 MiByte: Damn Small Linux is one of the best known ones, however it uses a 2.4 kernel. There is a sister project called Damn Small Linux - Not, which has a 2.6 kernel (although it seems it hasn't been updated in years).
Another project worth noting is grml, a Live-CD for system administration tasks. It does not boot into a graphic environment, and is therefore quite fast; however, it still contains about 2 GiByte of software compressed onto a CD-ROM. But it also has a smaller flavor, aptly named grml-small, which only contains about 200 MiByte of software compressed into 60 MiByte.
Then there is Morphix, which is a Live-CD builder toolkit based on Knoppix. ("Morphable Knoppix"!) Morphix is basically a tool to build your own special purpose Live-CD.
The last thing I want to mention is MachBoot. MachBoot is a super-fast Live-CD. It uses various techniques to massively speed up the boot process. I believe they even trace the order in which blocks are accessed during booting and then remaster the ISO so that those blocks are laid out contiguously on the medium. Their current record is less than 6 seconds to boot into a full graphical desktop environment. However, this also seems to be stale.
One key piece of advice I can give is that most LiveCDs use a compressed filesystem called squashfs to cram as much data on the CD as possible. Since you don't need compression, you could run the mksquashfs step (present in most tutorials) with -noDataCompression and -noFragmentCompression to save on decompression time. You may even be able to drop the squashfs approach entirely, but this would require some restructuring. This may actually be slower depending on your CD-ROM read speed vs. CPU speed, but it's worth looking into.
This Ubuntu tutorial was effective enough for me to build a LiveCD based on 8.04. It may be useful for getting the feel of how a LiveCD is composed, but I would probably not recommend using an Ubuntu LiveCD.
If at all possible, find a minimal LiveCD and build up with only minimal stripping out, rather than stripping down a huge LiveCD like Ubuntu. There are some situations in which the smaller distros are using smaller/faster alternatives rather than just leaving something out. If you want to get seriously hardcore, you could look at Linux From Scratch, and include only what you want, but that's probably more time than you want to spend.
Creating Your Own Custom Ubuntu 7.10 Or Linux Mint 4.0 Live-CD With Remastersys
Depends on your distro. Here's a good article you can check out from LWN.net
There is a book I used which covers a lot of distros, though it does not cover creating a flash-bootable image. The book is Live Linux(R) CDs: Building and Customizing Bootables. You can use it with supplemental information from your distro of choice.
So, just as a final update for anyone reading this later - the tool I ended up using was "livecd-creator".
My reason for choosing this tool was that it is available for RedHat-based distributions like CentOs, Fedora and RHEL - which are all distributions that my company supports already. In addition, while the project is very poorly documented it is extremely customizable. I was able to create a minimal LiveCD and edit the boot sequence so that it booted directly into the firmware updater instead of a bash shell.
The whole job would have only taken an hour or two if there had been a README explaining the configuration file!
Debian Live provides the best tools for building a Linux Live CD. Webconverger uses Debian Live for example.
It's very easy to use.
sudo apt-get install live-helper # from Debian unstable, which should work fine from Ubuntu
lh_config # edit config/* to your liking
sudo lh_build

Resources