HP Thin Client - Kirkwood core

I covered this a few days ago on riscos.info:

http://www.riscos.info/index.php?title=Special:AWCforum&action=st/id78/And_a_thin_client

After a bit more research, this is much more like what I’ve been hoping for over the BeagleBoard – US$200, has a real case, better video, possibly faster (1.2GHz on a Kirkwood core, but it’s a different design, so careful with the comparisons), sensible amounts of memory (512MB) and 512MB flash, but that could be expanded with USB etc.

Does any one care to share opinions on the viability of a RISC OS port to this?

Marvell have “functional” documents for the Kirkwood SoC’s available for free on this page From a quick skim through it doesn’t look like they go into quite as much detail as TI do in their docs, but it’s certainly a lot better than having nothing at all.

Of course there’s no video controller in the Kirkwood SoC’s, so there’s no guarantee that we’ll have access to the required documentation for the graphics chipset in the t5325 (Although the HP website does describe it as “Marvell ARM integrated graphics”). There’s also unlikely to be a reference manual for the board, so working out the finer details of what GPIO pins control what, etc. could be a bit of a struggle. If you’re lucky Linux will get ported to it and it will be possible to use that as a reference. OK, so HP’s ThinPro OS is allegedly Linux-based, but I can’t immediately see any download links for source code, so there’s no telling what magic closed-source components are used by the OS to bring the device to life.

I don’t think you’re going to find any devices of this type which don’t run Linux (ARM based ones, that is). The only other practical choice would be WinCE, but that’s poorly suited to this type of application (but it’s present in many ARM netbooks and any number of portable devices, however).

The distribution they’re using (ThinPro) is Debian-based. In practice that means a deal of openness, but we’ll have to wait and see until people start getting their hands on them to know for sure. But it does seem like they are already using an x86 version of this in their existing clients.

I am still trying to extract meaningful specs from Marvell regarding their Kirkwood 88F6281. I registered with their Extranet, got a phone call from their local sales representative, tried to explain to them what I am trying to achieve, and they agreed to send me an email with the login details. And I am still waiting…

Regarding the HP ThinClient, I would say that at the moment, the eInfoChips/Globalscale OpenRD-Client/OpenRD-Base machines are a better bet – they have Gigabit Ethernet, S-ATA and eS-ATA, a SD card slot and a serial port. The OpenRD-Client has unfortunately a not-very-good Volari GPU on board, the OpenRD-Base however has a free PCI-Express x1 slot on board – this could either be used to connect a PCI bridge or to slot in one of the ATI x1 graphics cards.

The source code of the used Linux OS is apparently available via SVN.

Still no further specs but there’s now a datasheet , which I don’t remember finding yesterday.

Remember that the HP client isn’t even for sale yet, so information may be a little scant. As for OpenRD client, this is personally less interesting – again, due to graphics. For myself, I really want to do at least 1680×1050.

Anyway, this platform interests me a great deal. I’d like to do the port myself, but it’s a huge investment of time, and there are too many other RISC OS projects demanding my attention right now. I will revisit the situation in the new year, to see what the comments are of people who have the Linux version, and review my own situation.

[snipped] As for OpenRD client, this is personally less interesting – again, due to graphics. For myself, I really want to do at least 1680×1050. [snipped]

(Sorry to snip you again, Peter)

Any idea what resolution the Volari chip (referred to in the openrd-client_user_guide.pdf) offers?

1600×1200 isn’t quite enough :-(

The user guide mentions a maximum of 1280×1024. Even if the graphics chip can nominally do 1600×1200 (and probably also 1680×1050), then there may be architecture limitations that limit it to lower.

The LinuxDevices article claims this device is Kirkwood, but if it’s got integrated Marvell graphics, it can’t be Kirkwood. I could believe PXA168 (aka Armada 168,) though.

The troubleshooting guide for it claims that the OS is on IDE. This may mean that it’s on a CF card or something, that’s a best-case scenario, though. (For example, Genesi’s box has the 4 GiB Flash attached via PATA, but PATA isn’t exposed on the board.) What that would mean is that we could replace the CF card with a much larger one with RISC OS on it.

One HP partner company has informed me that the t5325 list price will be €260 to €275. I’m still awaiting technical details, including feasibility of booting from an alternative OS.

• Quote price £157.60+VAT (+ carriage presumably)
• Due in stock 29 Jan
• Still investigating for me the feasibility of booting an alternative OS (will post here if/when supplied)

N.B. HP website lists £170+VAT RRP. (The more expensive model seems to have an integral VGA port, although I’m unsure of the reason as there’s apparently a VGA adapter included anyway with an additional VGA port must be for dual monitor use.)

I am still trying to extract meaningful specs from Marvell regarding their Kirkwood 88F6281.

The linuxfordevices.com article referred to by Peter mentions Martin Michlmayr as being a Debian hacker. It’s a real long shot but as he now works for HP, perhaps he could share some knowledge! Does anyone have any contacts connections to him ? (However, bearing in mind his involvement with the FOSS movement , the Castle license may dissuade him.)

Er, his Contact page? :)

http://www.cyrius.com/contact/

Er, his Contact page? :)

Great, but sometimes emails out of the blue are less favourably received than those via other means.

However, when (if) further technical info is available, I’m happy to make direct contact if someone else hasn’t already done so.

Ah. See what you mean. Good luck with getting in touch.

Interesting – the “final” datasheet that Trevor found lists the maximum display resolution as 1600×1200. But the H.P. website link from today says that the maximum is 1680×1050x16bpp (or 1440×900x24bpp).

...maximum display resolution…

Jeffrey’s display resolutions must be correct. This 4AA0-2232EEE December 2009 document and its quoted resolutions are identical to one emailed to me today by an HP partner. I think we can safely assume that the “final” datasheet is incorrect (especially as it’s in the press_kits part of their site).

N.B. If previously listed links become broken, follow ‘Essentials’ from the static link (stated on the above document, although note ”eur” so not sure about the rest of the world).

Interesting – the “final” datasheet that Trevor found lists the maximum display resolution as 1600×1200. But the H.P. website link from today says that the maximum is 1680×1050×16bpp (or 1440×900×24bpp).

Actually, the latter PDF doesn’t mention “maximum”. Most likely 1600×1200x16bpp is perfectly possible, but it’s no longer a common resolution as it was with CRTs, since almost all larger LCDs are widescreen, and don’t display the 4:3 modes well, and so people would be concerned with the native LCD resolutions instead. I was really hoping for 32bpp here, so this might have me looking for something else.

• 640×480, 800×480, 800×600, 1024×768, 1152×864 (up to 24 bit color depth)
• 1280×720, 1280×768, 1280×800, 1280×960,1280×1024 (up to 24 bit color depth)
• 1366×768, 1368×768 (up to 24 bit color depth)
• 1400×1050,1440×900 (up to 24 bit color depth)
• 1600×1200, 1680×1050 (up to 16 bit color depth)

One thing to look out for with the later XScales (which I’m assuming includes Kirkwood SoCs, but it looks like the specs on their “Sheeva” CPU core are not public so I can’t say for sure) is that they reused the FPA coprocessor opcodes for their own iwMMXt FP unit. That’s potentially a major headache for RISC OS compatibility – our toolchains aren’t set up either for alternate FP instruction sets or for softfloat libraries, and FPEmulator cannot function (because those opcodes no longer trigger an undefined instruction trap).

However, when (if) further technical info is available, I’m happy to make direct contact if someone else hasn’t already done so.

Martin Michlmayr kindly replied as follows:

First of all, I should say that my work at HP is not related to the t5325 at all; everything I know about the t5325 (which is very little) was gathered from other sources rather than from HP. I was interested in porting Debian to the t5325 and I think I found out who the right contact at HP is to talk about this device but in the end I didn’t contact them. The reason for this is that my time is limited and there are other devices where my work probably has a bigger impact. Specifically, I’m talking about the OpenRD-Client, which was mentioned on your forum too. The advantage of the OpenRD-Client compared to the t5325 is that it’s documented really well and that it has a serial console and JTAG for debugging. The t5325 will probably require some hardware hacking to get access to the serial console. Even if you decide that the t5325 is a more attractive target, the OpenRD-Client might be a better choice for an initial port – after all, you’ll first have to port RISC OS to the Kirkwood platform. The OpenRD-Client is a dev board and you might also get some information/help from Marvell. [___@marvell.com removed to avoid spam][1] in particular is a good contact and might be supportive of your efforts. In case you do want to go ahead with the t5325, then I can try to get in touch with the folks at HP who produced this device and see if they are willing to share any information. The folks that developed this hardware are based in Pennsylvania, US. I doubt the HP Labs folks [in Bristol] were involved, although I might of course be wrong.

¹ Communicated separately to ROOL and Jeffrey Lee for reference.

I’ve just ordered an HP t5325, VY623AT#ABA, and I’m guessing it’ll arrive on Tuesday or Wednesday. (I ordered it from a reseller, cheaper that way, and faster.)

I’ll open it up, document what’s inside, maybe play around with Linux on it, and then close it back up, and sell it.

I’ll go ahead and say that, if anyone here is interested, I’m willing to ship it to the UK. Priority Mail International shipping would be $38.19, based on HP’s quoted shipping weight of 4.67 pounds.

I’ll go ahead and note that there are two models. VY623AT is the cheaper model, and appears to have a single DVI-I port. Suitable for your old CRT (via an included DVI-I to VGA adapter,) your shiny new DVI-equipped LCD, or anything in between.

VY623AA is the more expensive model, and appears to add a VGA port, for a second monitor. I believe the same resolution restrictions apply to this one as the DVI-I port – 1680×1050 or 1600×1200 maximum.

Preliminary report:

The device is fairly hefty for what it is. Lots of metal.

Disassembly will DETECTABLY void the warranty. There’s plastic rivets here. They break when you take it apart.

There appears to be a 4-pin header for serial. I’ve not verified that yet.

There appears to be pads on the front for an SD connector.

The flash is soldered to the motherboard.

CPU IS a Marvell Kirkwood 88F6281. Mine is revision A0.

Graphics are XGI Volari Z11.

There are pads for a SATA connector. However, there’s not enough room in the case for a drive.

So, here’s some 7.1 megapixel images:

http://bhtooefr.ath.cx/images/IMG_1322.JPG http://bhtooefr.ath.cx/images/IMG_1323.JPG

Output of dmesg:

http://bhtooefr.ath.cx/files/dmesg

Disassembly instructions:

Remove screw on back panel, slide back panel to the left (when looking at the back)
Break the three plastic rivets holding the plastic lid onto the back, slide back, and lift off
Should be able to slide the metal lid to the back, and lift off

If you wish to go further in (or if the instructions are inadequate for getting the metal lid off,) remove the screws holding the back panel in, slide it back and off, and slide the side panels back and off.

As for installing a drive, a 1.8” drive will probably fit, BARELY. CompactFlash will fit easily, although an adapter will be a tight fit.

There’s also, if you want a “real” drive, just drilling holes in the case, and running cables out.

Oh, and the specs for video are wrong – I’m running at 32 bpp, 1600×1200, a mode that HP says is impossible. And I didn’t do anything to get that, it just did it out of the box.