[HN Gopher] Efabless - Shutdown Notice
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Efabless - Shutdown Notice
        
       Author : KenoFischer
       Score  : 46 points
       Date   : 2025-03-01 18:37 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (efabless.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (efabless.com)
        
       | fourier54 wrote:
       | Totally expected. No business model at all. Miracle it worked for
       | so many years.
        
       | jauntywundrkind wrote:
       | We really need a silicon foundry model again, somewhere somehow,
       | where folks can get experienced deigning chips.
       | 
       | America's such a technology hub because of our silicon foundry,
       | because of MOSIS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSIS
       | 
       | Carver Mead & Lynn Conway got countless students & interested
       | parties out there, making chips. _Introduction to VLSI Design_
       | was a book, but also a whole practice of getting out there and
       | doing the thing for real. So so so much innovation  & creativity
       | followed.
       | 
       | Efabless felt like such a great hope that the tradition could
       | continue, that maybe perhaps we could have a new age of newcomers
       | also starting to make chips.
        
         | ForTheKidz wrote:
         | RIP Lynn Conway. Huge loss to the industry. I hadn't realized
         | she had passed until now.
        
         | throwaway3572 wrote:
         | It's still possible to get a chip made, via MPW, from SkyWater.
         | 
         | And you can still use all the open source stuff, like the
         | eFabless pad frame, if you want. But you'll have to work with
         | SkyWater directly which does require various business
         | agreements to be in place.
         | 
         | See more here:
         | 
         | https://www.skywatertechnology.com/technology-and-design-ena...
        
           | 15155 wrote:
           | > require various business agreements to be in place.
           | 
           | I assume they require an NDA for their PDK? Or can projects
           | still be meaningfully open-source with the existing one?
        
             | jauntywundrkind wrote:
             | SkyWater's 130nm has been used for all (most?) of the
             | Efabless x Google MPW (multi project wafer) runs. That PDK
             | was open sourced as part of that initial effort.
             | 
             | https://www.skywatertechnology.com/first-google-sponsored-
             | mp...
             | 
             | https://github.com/google/skywater-pdk
             | 
             | There's a bunch of other PDKs running around now too. But
             | progress does seem to have distinctly tapered off.
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | A bunch? I've only seen three--but that's still a huge
               | improvement over zero pre-Skywater.
        
           | bgnn wrote:
           | Muse semi is an easier path. For Europe there is Europractice
           | which gives access to pretty much any technology.
           | 
           | The problem is access to software and fabs. EDA is expensive
           | and nobody will give access to individuals. Same for fabs.
           | They don't want to give access to a lot of people due to IP
           | theft risks. Anyone can be a North Korean hacker. Plus they
           | operate under US export controls which makes the paperwork
           | daunting.
        
       | throwaway_3133 wrote:
       | This is what happens when you advertise a shuttle run for "open
       | source" designs, brazenly backdoor everybody's chips with a
       | Management Engine (google "eFabless Caravel") and then, to top it
       | all off, act like you can just show up at CCC and pretend
       | everything is fine:
       | 
       | https://media.ccc.de/v/38c3-the-design-decisions-behind-the-...
       | 
       | Video from 38c3 talk 2024-Dec-29; question at time 31min:17sec.
       | 
       | This company, and its enablers (formerly) at Google, set back the
       | progress of open source chip design by at least three full years
       | with this bait-and-switch insanity. The people who could see
       | through the ruse wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole;
       | meanwhile it sucked up all the students, momentum, and funding.
       | 
       | Think about what three years of progress is worth in the tech
       | industry.
        
         | kragen wrote:
         | How would you do a multi-project chip without something like a
         | "management engine"? By the nature of semiconductor
         | fabrication, you have a bunch of identical chips, but you want
         | each contributor to the chip to be able to use it for testing
         | their own contribution. It seems like that means you need some
         | way to dynamically configure which of the many projects on the
         | chip are actually connected to its I/O pins?
         | 
         | To clarify, since unfortunately griefers are flagging your
         | comment to impede the discussion, so I'm not allowed to reply
         | to it: Tiny Tapeout is a multi-project chip, not a multi-
         | project wafer (though it is one chip in a multi-project wafer).
         | Typical minimum die sizes are 0.8mm2, which is about 2 million
         | potential transistors in 130nm processes. That's big enough to
         | put many projects on a chip. That's why Tiny Tapeout cost
         | US$300 while MPW prices start at about US$3000 and more
         | typically US$9999+.
        
           | throwaway_3133 wrote:
           | It's a multi-project _wafer_ not a multi-project _chip_.
           | 
           | They cut the wafer apart into individual chips. There is
           | _one_ project on each chip.
           | 
           | This has been going on since the 1970s. It is a very well-
           | understood process.
        
             | throwaway_3133 wrote:
             | All eFabless designs for the first two years of the program
             | were multi-project _wafers_ with single-project _chips_.
             | And they still required the management engine.
             | 
             | Over the past year they tried an experimental "multi-
             | project chip" (first samples shipped 14 months ago). But
             | the management engine was a requirement _long_ before this
             | happened.
             | 
             | GP seems to have edited their comment, but I can't edit
             | mine (even though it is only 8 minutes old)
        
           | Etheryte wrote:
           | Sidenote: On HN you can often get downvoted/flagged not only
           | for what you say, but for the way you say it. I wouldn't
           | really call it griefing, rather a call for more civil
           | discussion. If an account is new or a throwaway it gets held
           | to this standard even stronger because no one really wants to
           | see a HN that's flooded by throwaway accounts writing Reddit
           | style comments.
        
           | echoangle wrote:
           | Why do you need a management engine for that? Couldn't you
           | just bond the connections to the ones you want and leave the
           | other disconnected? Basically just have all chips next to
           | each other on the die and only use one?
        
             | danhor wrote:
             | I/O pads (and their drivers) take up a huge amount of
             | space. For some simpler ICs their die size is determined by
             | their Pads.
        
         | smallmancontrov wrote:
         | That was a front door not a back door! They were 100% open
         | about the fact that it was there and most people wanted it to
         | be there. If it didn't exist they would have to invent it. Why
         | should I be the slightest bit upset about this?
        
       | sgnelson wrote:
       | That's a real shame.
       | 
       | I haven't paid that much attention, but in my utopia, they would
       | have received some funding from the CHIPS act just to act as a
       | gateway for educating people on how to design and make chips. But
       | we live here.
        
       | kragen wrote:
       | These were the Tiny Tapeout folks, right? Or am I confusing two
       | different things? https://tinytapeout.com/ doesn't have any
       | shutdown notices.
       | 
       | Looks like yes: https://store.efabless.com/products/tiny-tapeout-
       | project
       | 
       | KenoFischer says no, Tiny Tapeout was using eFabless as their
       | service provider and is looking into alternatives.
       | 
       | Something's fishy. https://efabless.com/news doesn't list any
       | shutdown notices.
        
         | KenoFischer wrote:
         | My understanding is that the TinyTapeout people were using
         | efabless as a service provider and efabless was also providing
         | some sponsorship, but that they are institutionally distinct.
         | There's a LinkedIn post from the TinyTapeout folks that they're
         | looking into alternatives.
        
           | kragen wrote:
           | That's a relief! And Tiny Tapeout has already done a beta
           | with IHP's open-source 130nm BiCMOS SiGe PDK.
           | 
           | The IHP PDK is really a lot more exciting to me than the
           | Skywater stuff because it's aimed at submillimeter analog
           | things (450GHz f[?], 650GHz fastest oscillator) and why would
           | you fab a digital design in 130nm instead of just programming
           | an FPGA?
        
             | bgnn wrote:
             | IHP is excitinybut their PDK is horrible compared to major
             | fabs like TSMC or GF. Anyone using it for products hate it.
        
       | kiwih wrote:
       | I am devastated by this news. I was lucky enough to work with
       | Mohamed and Andy for several projects (including taping out the
       | world's first ChatGPT-authored silicon [0]), and I've never met
       | people more passionate about making chip design and silicon tape-
       | out accessible to all. This is a real loss for the academic and
       | maker communities.
       | 
       | [0] https://cyber.nyu.edu/2024/07/22/chipchat-nyu-tandon-team-
       | fa...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-01 23:00 UTC)