Sebastian has just made a rather amazing disclosure of his new Axoloti design here, and he has obviously put A LOT of time and effort into this. His effort shows too… very well thought out, and it has a lot of advantages!
And yet… crickets. I’m amazed that nobody else here is commenting on this. Sebastian needs feedback from other users on this. Don’t be shy people.
Regards,
MagAmp
The fact that he’s basing it on the stable axoloti firmware pre 2.0 is cause for celebration, wish we could migrate the AKSO board back to that stable firmware.
Having hardware that works with the existing stable software is obviously the first priority, and a critical need. Kudos to Sebastian for recognizing that and acting on it.
I’d love to know from you guys’ first hand experience what made v2.0 necessary/desirable/what improvements it brought to Axoloti? I have never really used or looked into v2.0 as of yet except for the Akso version.
Akso and Axoloti user here. The only thing I find useful is having the summary of perf when compiling a patch
Memory region Used Size Region Size %age Used
SRAM: 31228 B 384 KB 7.94%
SRAM2: 0 GB 8 KB 0.00%
SRAM3: 2804 B 118 KB 2.32%
CCMSRAM: 21552 B 116 KB 18.14%
SDRAM: 0 GB 32 MB 0.00%
Beside that, you know how buggy it is…
But I’m still using the Akso for the performances. (x4 an Axoloti).
Good idea! From the looks of it it seems like Axoloti is using an older version of the whole gcc arm compiler toolchain, which does not support this option yet. I hacked in the newer compiler and it does work for the firmware itself but not for the patch compilation.
Right now I can’t be bothered to check why 
It would be a nightmare to upgrade the toolchain anyway.
Yeah, it’s a great piece of info but probably not a priority.
