Embedded World 2015 with 4DSP

info_header_kurz-en-2015

Time to resurrect this blog and use it for what it was intended – an ad hoc, unstructured means of sharing information.  Information on what?  Well I figure most people reading this will be engineers and other technical folks, so probably many on and off topic subjects that I find interesting may be interesting for you, too.  Previous posts ranged from GPU programming to FPGAs to politics to ethics and I don’t see this changing.  The latter may be an unusual slant, but I believe strongly it is a subject that engineers and scientists should delve into, even if unwillingly.  What are the repercussions of surveillance, of Silicon Valley solutionism, for example?

4DSP Logo

Back to more practical matters on the short term.  24-26 February sees the annual Embedded World exhibition and conference in Nurnberg / Nuremberg, Germany.  I will be in attendance with 4DSP at booth 611 in hall 4.  Please feel free to make an appointment or just drop past and have a chat about the latest 4DSP Xilinx Ultrascale FPGA boards and high speed digitizers and waveform generators.  Or about the role of technology in current world events.  It’s all interesting.

Ethics and your Graphics Processing Unit (GPU)

With great power comes great responsibility goes the phrase.  In computing circles I would say that we’d be liable to think more along the lines of With great power comes great electricity bills or With great power comes great cooling problems.  But should we also be more often considering the original intention?  Should we as the engineers wielding the computer power be concerned with how this technology could be abused?  A quick trawl of the internet shows precious little concern for such issues – we are almost all completely entranced by the rush of technical possibilities coming at us.  If we give the matter any concern at all we tend to think in altruistic terms, of the great potential for a safer, more organized, more open, more equal, more efficient and faster world.

In 2011 there was a flood of news reports about how GPUs (Graphics Processing Units) could be used for more than pretty graphics and be used to target such tasks as decryption and password cracking.  This of course was a good way to raise publicity for GPGPU (General Purpose GPU) and create a new market for the likes of NVIDIA and AMD.  Programming tools such as CUDA and OpenCL made leveraging the massively parallel architectures of GPUs for non-graphics tasks much easier.  Decrypting secure data and cracking passwords were apparently well suited to such devices. [1][2][3]

From an engineering point of view it is exciting to understand the challenges of cracking modern encryption methods and to see the effect of password length on complexity.  Up to eight random characters is apparently quite straightforward and can be done within hours.  Going to ten characters can suddenly take decades.  Going beyond this can quickly take millennia.  The mathematical theory behind all this is quite fascinating. [4]

Another area often mentioned in the same breath as GPUs is computational finance.  This is the world of so-called quants.  These chaps are attracted from the fields of science into the world of financial engineering.  High performance computing is used to predict stock market movements, calculate pricing, quantify risk, etc.  The more horsepower we have the more chance we have of outsmarting the competition.  We learn of such things as high frequency trading where automated buying and selling are made so rapidly that sometimes the investment is held only for milliseconds. We learn that latency is critical and by locating a computer centre closer to the exchange and improving data throughput, we can get further advantage. [5]

If you attend a high performance computing conference you will be able to attend any number of talks given by academics or software engineers detailing the astonishing breakthroughs they have made in areas such as these.  But while listening to such information should we not also use our well trained and agile minds to question the greater ramifications of what we are actually doing?

Is the cracking of passwords and accessing confidential information always good?  Is being able to see finance as mathematical models devoid of a bricks and mortar, flesh and blood reality really of sound use?  If we touch on such questions at all then we will hear about system administrators who lose access to vital company information.  We hear about people losing access to personal, irreplaceable documents and photographs.  We hear about security agencies needing access the communications of criminals and terrorists.  In finance, we are told that we will get better liquidity, better market stability and that the competition will bring value.

But do we really believe all this?  Does this kind of computing power really give us a more stable, more efficient financial sector?  We can learn that high frequency trading skims off money from the transactions between investors and businesses, a form of unauthorized taxation as they pre-empt genuine trades.  We witness phenomena such as the flash crash of 2010 as algorithms compound on errors to create chaotic spikes. [6]  We can hide behind the maths of risk to the exclusion of real facts such as the unsustainable house of cards that was sub-prime.  While the banking sector has pretty much recovered, there are legions of ordinary people with reduced pensions, bankrupt businesses, lost savings, without work and facing austerity measures cutting benefits and services. [7]

The impact of being able to break passwords, decrypt secure communication and monitor all internet traffic is altogether more sinister and raises questions about the kind of world we wish to live in.  We naively assume that we have nothing to hide and that such technology is used for our collective safety.  We can intercept terrorist plots and illegal business activities for example.  It is now technically possible to monitor all internet traffic in a small to medium size country [8][9] and within a year or two it will be possible to affordably do so for any country.  The cost of such processing power would apparently come in at less than one modern fighter jet.  Scaling up from the systems already available this is quite believable. [10]

When discussing such issues with an engineer friend, he claimed he was not worried because likely it would not be possible to monitor the data in any useful way.  This underestimates the ingenuity and rate of progress of the computing world.  Google serves a significant proportion of the world’s internet users and already tracks a massive range of statistics of these people.  Gmail scans emails and based on content displays adverts.  Search history, links clicked and more are stored.  Google have already showed that the theory works fine.

As people, as engineers, we like to assume that the technology we create will be used for good.  We tout the so-called Twitter and Facebook revolutions as examples of how technology is opening up the world and allowing repressed peoples to overthrow corrupt despots[11], but we fail to see how the same technologies allow those same despots to monitor their own people.  We do not hear often how the Iranian government used Facebook to identify the protestors and their families. [12]  We do not also hear often about how easy it is to track the internet activities of our heroic freedom campaigners.  And what should happen if we should become disillusioned with our own governments?  Would we be allowed to democratically protest and oust them, or would the technological might and subsequent rule of law be used against us under a flimsy patriotic pretext?

And where will it all stop?  If our on-line and mobile communications can be monitored what about our off-line personal discussions with our fellow freedom fighters / terrorists (delete depending on view point)?  As Google Glass makes its entrance, backed with on-the-fly translation[13] and facial recognition [14] then we see that technically speaking we could also monitor everything we do, see, hear and say.  If we are not careful we will find that we are engaged in a technology enabled race to the bottom of morality, a desperate fight to protect a way of life that we’d already lost.

References

1.       https://securityledger.com/new-25-gpu-monster-devours-passwords-in-seconds/
2.       http://erratasec.blogspot.nl/2011/06/password-cracking-mining-and-gpus.html#.UZ90kLVmh8E
3.       http://www.cyint.in/products_decryptiontools.htm
4.       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Password_cracking
5.       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_frequency_trading
6.       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Flash_Crash
7.       http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/05/bank-record-profits-fdic-unemployment-housing
8.       http://surveillance.rsf.org/en/amesys/
9.       http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=18932&catid=74&Itemid=30
10.     “Freedom and the Future of the Internet”, Julian Assange, 2012. http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/?p=3429
11.     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Revolution
12.     “The Net Delusion”, Evgeny Morozov, 2012, http://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/morozovch1.pdf, p10
13.     http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/23/google-glass-inspired-specs-auto-translate_n_1695008.html
14.     http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jun/03/google-glass-facial-recognition-ban

Why use FPGAs for data acquisition systems?

Why would you want to purchase an ADC (analogue to digital convertor) or DAC (digital to analogue convertor) for use with an FPGA module?  This is an important question.  The choice of FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array chip) over say a conventional CPU or DSP, or even a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) means for many people a leap into the unknown.  We move away from the familiar world of programming in languages such as C/C++ or .NET (C#, VB etc) and have to deal with more esoteric means such as VHDL or Verilog.  There are of course new tools to simplify the programming of FPGAs but they have their limitations and are often prohibitively expensive.

ImageImage

ImageImage

Two FPGA cards and two FMC I/O cards

So, I return to my question, why move to FPGAs?  No one decides out of the blue one day that they want an FPGA based system.  What we want is a means to process our data and in the context of this article we’re assuming real world data being received from sensors and/or being generated and transmitted (ADCs and DACs respectively).  Say we want to acquire a number of channels of data, for example radio signals from a variety of positions.  We can connect our antennas to ADCs.  Then what?  We need to do something with the digitized data.  We could store this to disk for off line analysis.  We could monitor the data for specific signatures and alert a user.  In either case once we go above a certain sampling frequency and number of channels the sheer quantity of data is likely to prove a handful.  We’re going to have issues with:

·         Transfer speed

·         Storage speed

·         Storage space

·         Processing

Transfer speed would be the bandwidth from the ADC over the data link to a disk, CPU or network card.  Storage speed would be the speed at which we can write data to a hard disk or solid state disk.  Storage space refers to the fact that disk space is finite and keeping the quantity of data for off-line processing manageable.  Processing here refers to real-time processing – this should keep up with the rate of data acquisition.

A single modern ADC module can easily produce in excess of 5GBytes/second.  The fastest links typically found in a computer can handle around 6GBytes/second sustained.  But that is only the beginning of our problems.  Once the data has arrived at the CPU what do we do with it?  The fact is that such a data stream will easily saturate the capabilities of even a powerful CPU especially if we must re-order the data and do complex digital signal processing.

Tools such as NVIDIA’s CUDA have allowed simpler programming of GPUs for non-graphics purposes (read general purpose processing) and these add in cards are often quite suited to the purpose of signal processing.  But even here we are taxing our system considerably, relying on predictable data transfers, introducing latency with every step and on top of it all we should expect relatively high power consumption.  A GPU can easily require in excess of 200W and a high end CPU can require more than 125W.  So our reasonably low cost, easy to program system is going to be relatively large, need considerable cooling and will consume a fair bit of power.  And what happens if we have many more sensors and therefore more ADCs?

It is when we hit these issues that we start looking at alternatives and we learn about FPGAs.  We learn that these little marvels can outperform any CPU and even GPU for the typical signal processing tasks and at a fraction of the power consumption.  We then figure that we do not want a discrete ADC card with its own application programming interface (API) that would still need to transfer data to the FPGA via the host CPU.  We realize that the ADC should interface directly with the FPGA module.  We then read about FMC – FPGA Mezzanine Card and the many very high performance ADCs (faster, higher resolution can be more insight to your data) available in this form factor and the many FPGA modules supporting these daughter cards.  Just mount the ADC directly on the FPGA module, what could be easier?  Then we remember that we’ve left the world of our favourite programming languages and we need to learn a whole new approach.  It’s a step into the unknown for many, a steep learning curve, complex and expensive tools, but the performance benefits are clear as day and the allure of greater depth of analysis is irresistible and game changing.

Now the blurb – Hybrid DSP has the experience to advise on and supply some of the highest performance ADCs, DACs, video and other input/output cards on the market.  All these I/O products are available exclusively as FPGA daughter cards.  You may choose to configure the FPGA card as a simple glue-logic interface to a host computer, or you may elect to have the FPGA card perform the complete processing chain, or you may choose any number of steps in between.  A hybrid or heterogeneous system may use the FPGA card for re-organizing the data, some simple pre-processing that will not tax your FPGA skills too highly nor require too large and expensive an FPGA.  You then may do the complex signal processing (e.g. FFTs) on a GPU card.

As I said no one wakes up one day and decides to go with FPGA and FPGA I/O daughter cards.  We just end up here.  And that’s where Hybrid DSP comes in with our fairly unique approach to advising on and putting together systems that meet requirements while balancing cost, development time, skills, power consumption and size.