Site Home   Archive Home   FAQ Home   How to search the Archive   How to Navigate the Archive   
Compare FPGA features and resources   

Threads starting:
1994JulAugSepOctNovDec1994
1995JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1995
1996JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1996
1997JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1997
1998JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1998
1999JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1999
2000JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2000
2001JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2001
2002JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2002
2003JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2003
2004JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2004
2005JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2005
2006JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2006
2007JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2007
2008JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2008
2009JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2009
2010JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2010
2011JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2011
2012JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2012
2013JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2013
2014JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2014
2015JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2015
2016JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2016
2017JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2017
2018JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2018
2019JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2019
2020JanFebMarAprMay2020

Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Custom Search

Messages from 145050

Article: 145050
Subject: Re: State Machine Initialization in Synplify Pro
From: Mike Treseler <mtreseler@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 09:19:07 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Martin Thompson wrote:

> Personally, I'm impressed that I can write a simple description of my
> logic and get a complicated near-optimal synthesis result out in a
> large number of cases - I wonder if I'm alone? :)

I agree.
If it sims and meets timing I'm usually done.
But then, I don't need that last LUT and that last nS.

     -- Mike Treseler

Article: 145051
Subject: Re: Networking Board Recommendation
From: vanepp@sfu.ca (Peter Van Epp)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:13:49 +0000 (UTC)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"stephen.craven@gmail.com" <stephen.craven@gmail.com> writes:

>All,

>Could someone point me to a board or boards that combine a modern FPGA
>with multiple ethernet PHYs?  The only multiple-ethernet board that I
>have discovered is based on a V2P.

>Thank you in advance.

>Stephen

	I'm interested in the same subject, I'd like dual gige PHYs and either 
PCIX or PCIE 4 lane to be able to get a fdx gige capture to the host. 
I assume the board you are referring to is the Digilent NetFPGA which would do 
me other than the PCI host bus (which won't do full speed gig). Everything else
that I've found so far is expensive. For instance a pair of gige PHYs (no fpga)
is around $600 US, so I am much heartened by John's comment Enterpoint is 
coming out with a gige PHY daughter board, I have a pair of their 10/100s 
PHYS already which are the only reasonably priced ones I found (other than
fpga4fun's dual channel, magnetics only, 10 only, no PHY on the dragon which 
is the cheapest way I've found of experimenting with ethernet :-)).
	There is a good list of fpga boards which specify bus and ethernet 
options if available at:

http://www.fpga-faq.com/FPGA_Boards.shtml

	For me for now I have a Draqon PCI board (~ $300 US) from fpga4fun
and as noted two of John's PHYs to see if I can actually do what I want before
investing in something gig capable. It may be worth looking at the fpga4fun
pcie board (which has a virtex5 in it but no PHYS) if you are cost sensitive
like me. If you have money, then the list above does have boards though :-). 
	I'd be interested in any boards that you find as well.

Peter Van Epp

Article: 145052
Subject: ChipScope scripting for batch data collection?
From: Neil Steiner <neil.steiner@east.isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:59:09 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
A colleague and I were hoping to set up unattended ILA data collection 
over long periods and changing conditions.  I assumed that the ChipScope 
TCL support would provide a way to do that, but when I look more closely 
at the ChipScope Engine JTAG Tcl Interface, I find that most of its API 
provides only very low-level functionality.

The API in question supports interrogating a device as to its number of 
ILA cores, but beyond that, all of the transactions would have to happen 
through JTAG data/instruction shift commands.  I had hoped that the ICON 
or ILA documentation might at least describe the pertinent registers in 
those cores, but I seem unable even to find that, and all of my googling 
has been fruitless.

Can it really be that nobody else has worked out unattended data 
collection with ChipScope?  Please dispel that notion for me.  Any 
pointers or suggestions would be appreciated.

Article: 145053
Subject: Re: ChipScope scripting for batch data collection?
From: emeb <ebrombaugh@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:12:35 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Jan 22, 2:59=A0pm, Neil Steiner <neil.stei...@east.isi.edu> wrote:
> A colleague and I were hoping to set up unattended ILA data collection
> over long periods and changing conditions. =A0I assumed that the ChipScop=
e
> TCL support would provide a way to do that, but when I look more closely
> at the ChipScope Engine JTAG Tcl Interface, I find that most of its API
> provides only very low-level functionality.
>
> The API in question supports interrogating a device as to its number of
> ILA cores, but beyond that, all of the transactions would have to happen
> through JTAG data/instruction shift commands. =A0I had hoped that the ICO=
N
> or ILA documentation might at least describe the pertinent registers in
> those cores, but I seem unable even to find that, and all of my googling
> has been fruitless.
>
> Can it really be that nobody else has worked out unattended data
> collection with ChipScope? =A0Please dispel that notion for me. =A0Any
> pointers or suggestions would be appreciated.

I've been using Chipscope for 5 years now and the lack of high-level
scripting is one of my major complaints (the other being that the UI
bogs down when you create complex projects). It's fairly disappointing
that it's so difficult to build complex testing environments with
Chipscope - it seems like something that wouldn't be too hard to
support.

I ended up creating custom logic blocks to handle this which I
interface via a SPI port to an off-chip ARM processor, then to a PC
via USB. Not nearly as elegant as it could be if Chipscope had a
somewhat higher-level API.

Eric

Article: 145054
Subject: Re: offset constrain report confusion
From: Gabor <gabor@alacron.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:49:02 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Jan 22, 9:44=A0am, "realwood" <realwood1...@163.com> wrote:
> Hi, everybody:
> =A0 =A0 I'm confused with offset constraint and its report recently. Can =
anyone
> help me? Thanks very much!
>
> =A0 =A0 "din" is a input data whose bus width is 32bit. =A0I set a offset
> constraint :
>
> Net "din<31>" offset =3D IN 2ns before clk_in. Period of clk_in was
> constrained to 6ns. And i got a result in P&R report:
>
> =A0 =A0 Constraint =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Request =A0=
 =A0 =A0 Actual
>
> din<31>offset... =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 2ns =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0-3.17ns
>
> All constraints are met.
>
> =A0 =A0 According to my comprehension, din<31> can lag 3.17ns mostly behi=
nd
> rising edge of clk_in on the PAD. And after data path delay and clk path
> delay, din<31> can be sampled at the first FF correcttly and exactly. Am =
i
> right?
>
> =A0 =A0 But if din<31> arrive 2ns before clk_in rising edge just as offse=
t
> constraint said, after delay of data path and clk path, clk rising edge
> will present at nearly (2+3.17)ns with respect to din<31>, that is unstab=
le
> period of din<31>.
>
> =A0 =A0 How to explain this?
>
> =A0 =A0 Thanks, guys! =A0
>
> --------------------------------------- =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0
> Posted throughhttp://www.FPGARelated.com

You an explain this by looking at the other half of the
equation.  Your hold time will be very large, meaning
that you're not clocking in the data on the cycle
you intended to, unless the input signal also meets
the hold time requirement.

Article: 145055
Subject: Re: Spartan 3E Starter Kit - Power problem
From: =?ISO-8859-1?B?RGlu52F5IEFr5/ZyZW4=?= <dincay@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:43:32 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Jan 22, 5:18=A0pm, John_H <newsgr...@johnhandwork.com> wrote:
> On Jan 22, 9:44=A0am, Din=E7ay Ak=E7=F6ren <din...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have S3E starter kit. I accidentally connect a wrong power adaptor
> > and two power regulators on the board was burnt. I cannot replace them
> > because pads of the one of the regulators are under the package. So I
> > decided to make or purchase a power supply card and connect it to
> > starter kit. I have checked farnell.com and Linear Technology website
> > but cannot find anything useful. Are there any power supply cards for
> > FPGA's? Or any idea how I can re-operate my S3E board?
>
> Where would you connect a "power supply card" if there was one?

PCB has test pins for all voltage levels. So I have an access to
regulated voltage nets on PCB. I will use jumpers.

>
> Repairing a board with burnt components can be difficult, often
> requiring an intense effort to pick out the burnt pieces of FR4 that
> can be unintentionally conductive. =A0Even components with a pad
> underneath can be removed with a narrow focus heat gun, for instance.
> Even if you reflow nearby components, usually they're still in good
> shape afterward. =A0Adding "dams" to block the airflow around more
> sensitive parts nearby can help when reworking in this manner.

Removing them is easy. Hard part is replacing them.

>
> Do you know if your failed regulators have failed open? =A0If you try to
> wire in another regulator such as a linear.com uModule, you need to
> make sure the parts still on board can play nice with the new supply.

What do you mean by "failed open"?
I think you mean passive components on the board should play nice. If
they cause problems, I can remove them too since they will be useless
if the regulator is removed.


Article: 145056
Subject: Re: Spartan 3E Starter Kit - Power problem
From: glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 02:55:32 +0000 (UTC)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Din?ay Ak??ren <dincay@gmail.com> wrote:
(snip)
 
> What do you mean by "failed open"?
> I think you mean passive components on the board should play nice. If
> they cause problems, I can remove them too since they will be useless
> if the regulator is removed.

The two common failure modes for electrical components, especially
semiconductors, are to fail open (open circuit) or fail short
(short circuit).  The latter case is bad news for your FPGA.

-- glen 

Article: 145057
Subject: Re: FPGA farm
From: "StoneThrower" <digi_64-public[removethis]@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 04:30:08 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
> Are there such thing as FPGA farm (for cryptographical purposes),
Sure it is there. That farm is called NSA and employs farmers called MiBs 
(men in black). The farm is even remotely accessable via satelite called 
Echelon. That Echelon contains AI chip called Clipper. The legend goes that 
MiBs are using Clipper to feed the FPGA to read all our emails.

-- 
StoneThrower
www.dgmicrosys.com


Article: 145058
Subject: Re: Networking Board Recommendation
From: Ed McGettigan <ed.mcgettigan@xilinx.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 20:22:19 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Jan 21, 6:39=A0pm, "stephen.cra...@gmail.com"
<stephen.cra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> Could someone point me to a board or boards that combine a modern FPGA
> with multiple ethernet PHYs? =A0The only multiple-ethernet board that I
> have discovered is based on a V2P.
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> Stephen

Both the ML505/6/7 and the ML605 boards have a Marvel 88E1111 PHY/RJ45
and a SFP cage that can support 1000BASE-X or BASE-T Ethernet
modules.  This gives you two ethernet ports without an expansion card.

Ed McGettigan
--
Xilinx Inc.

Article: 145059
Subject: Re: FPGA farm
From: Thomas Womack <twomack@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Date: 23 Jan 2010 10:45:39 +0000 (GMT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In article <b48f5c25-73e0-4b57-8e71-d562a6b427cf@r19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Dennis Yurichev  <dennis.yurichev@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi.
>
>Are there such thing as FPGA farm (for cryptographical purposes),
>containing a lot of expensive FPGAs, and accessed remotely for some
>payment?

There's www.copacobana.org which is 120 x Virtex4 SX35 in a 2U box;
you can rent time on them by contacting cpaar@crypto.rub.de though I'm
not sure how big the farm actually is.

There's http://www.enterpoint.co.uk/merrick/supercomputers.html
which seems to be trying to set up a business model based on renting
time on their Merrick-1 boards, each of which contains a 10x10 array
of XC3SD3400A.

But I get the impression that this tends to be an area that small
businesses see as a gap in the market, and then turn as they try to
exploit the gap into single-purpose consultancies providing FPGA
boards to the oil-services or government markets rather than trying to
sell LUT*Hz as a commodity.  About the only shrink-wrap FPGA-array
application is breaking DES, and that's not terribly easy to monetize
because you tend to have a degree of official suspicion of your
customers.

I get the impression that big grids of FPGAs are normally sold at
enormous mark-up and in association with enormously expensive
properitary software as ASIC emulators

Tom

Article: 145060
Subject: Re: Spartan 3E Starter Kit - Power problem
From: =?ISO-8859-1?B?RGlu52F5IEFr5/ZyZW4=?= <dincay@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 07:50:37 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Jan 23, 4:55=A0am, glen herrmannsfeldt <g...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> Din?ay Ak??ren <din...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
> > What do you mean by "failed open"?
> > I think you mean passive components on the board should play nice. If
> > they cause problems, I can remove them too since they will be useless
> > if the regulator is removed.
>
> The two common failure modes for electrical components, especially
> semiconductors, are to fail open (open circuit) or fail short
> (short circuit). =A0The latter case is bad news for your FPGA.
>
> -- glen

It must be failed short, because regulators draw very high currents.
I wonder why there is no protection circuits. A simple zener would
prevent this accident.

Article: 145061
Subject: Xilinx online documentation issues
From: "stephen.craven@gmail.com" <stephen.craven@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 10:01:33 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Having been away from active FPGA development for a couple of years, I
was surprised to discover the sorry state of Xilinx's documentation.
Perhaps it has always been this way...

Xilinx Application Notes -- I have found two application notes on the
Chinese Xilinx site that do not appear on the main Xilinx web site
(XAPPs 730 and 934).  Has Xilinx pulled them?

Webpack Supported Devices -- A simple Google search for "Xilinx
webpack", performed to find the list of supported devices, returns out-
of-date information that is not appropriately marked.  Namely the
second hit (http://www.xilinx.com/ise/logic_design_prod/
webpack_faq.htm) is an FAQ for the 8.2 version of the tools.

Documentation Search Engine -- Though the main Xilinx site is up, I
cannot get their documentation search engine (http://www.xilinx.com/
support/documentation/index.htm) to respond.

Article: 145062
Subject: Post route simulation warning
From: "akshayvreddy" <akshayvreddy@n_o_s_p_a_m.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 17:26:13 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
When a preformed post route simulation it gave me this warnings. I am
having trouble in understanding them and why these warning come up. 

WARNING:Timing:3224 - The clock clkf_4 associated with OFFSET = IN 800 ns
BEFORE COMP "clkf_4"; does not clock any
   registered input components.
WARNING:Timing:3225 - Timing constraint OFFSET = IN 800 ns BEFORE COMP
"clkf_4"; ignored during timing analysis

Thank you for the help in advance	   
					
---------------------------------------		
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com

Article: 145063
Subject: How to connect two BNC connectors to FPGA board?
From: Alex <victous@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:08:02 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello All,

In my project some RF input from outside circuitry has to be converted
into digital form in ADC and then, after processing in FPGA, it will
be converted back into analog RF signal which is to be displayed on an
oscilloscope.

Hence, I am interested - how to connect BNC connectors to ADC and DAC
present on Xilinx Spartan-3E 1600E Microblaze Development Board?

Thank you.

Article: 145064
Subject: Re: Post route simulation warning
From: Muzaffer Kal <kal@dspia.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:54:18 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 17:26:13 -0600, "akshayvreddy"
<akshayvreddy@n_o_s_p_a_m.gmail.com> wrote:

>When a preformed post route simulation it gave me this warnings. I am
>having trouble in understanding them and why these warning come up. 
>
>WARNING:Timing:3224 - The clock clkf_4 associated with OFFSET = IN 800 ns
>BEFORE COMP "clkf_4"; does not clock any
>   registered input components.
>WARNING:Timing:3225 - Timing constraint OFFSET = IN 800 ns BEFORE COMP
>"clkf_4"; ignored during timing analysis
>
>Thank you for the help in advance	   

These outputs are from fpga tools (map and/or par) not from post-route
simulation. Post route simulation means getting the doing a gate level
simulation by annotating the gate level verilog output of PAR with the
SDF generated at the same time.
The first warning is telling you that the clock constraint you
generated in the UCF file has a problem ie the name doesn't match any
clocks or it's not connected to any nets. You probably misspelled it.
The second one is telling you pretty much the same thing ie because
the said clock doesn't clock any flops, the timing constraint is being
ignored during PAR.
-- 
Muzaffer Kal

DSPIA INC.
ASIC/FPGA Design Services

http://www.dspia.com

Article: 145065
Subject: Re: How to connect two BNC connectors to FPGA board?
From: =?ISO-8859-1?B?RGlu52F5IEFr5/ZyZW4=?= <dincay@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 01:58:25 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Jan 24, 10:08=A0am, Alex <vict...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> In my project some RF input from outside circuitry has to be converted
> into digital form in ADC and then, after processing in FPGA, it will
> be converted back into analog RF signal which is to be displayed on an
> oscilloscope.
>
> Hence, I am interested - how to connect BNC connectors to ADC and DAC
> present on Xilinx Spartan-3E 1600E Microblaze Development Board?
>
> Thank you.

You can use Digilent BNC connector. Xilinx Spartan-3E 1600E Microblaze
Development Board has appropriate 6 pin connectors.
http://www.digilentinc.com/Products/Detail.cfm?NavPath=3D2,401,541&Prod=3DP=
MOD-CON2


Article: 145066
Subject: Re: How to connect two BNC connectors to FPGA board?
From: Alex <victous@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 02:10:32 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On 24 =D1=8F=D0=BD=D0=B2, 11:58, Din=C3=A7ay Ak=C3=A7=C3=B6ren <din...@gmai=
l.com> wrote:
> On Jan 24, 10:08=C2=A0am, Alex <vict...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
>
> > In my project some RF input from outside circuitry has to be converted
> > into digital form in ADC and then, after processing in FPGA, it will
> > be converted back into analog RF signal which is to be displayed on an
> > oscilloscope.
>
> > Hence, I am interested - how to connect BNC connectors to ADC and DAC
> > present on Xilinx Spartan-3E 1600E Microblaze Development Board?
>
> > Thank you.
>
> You can use Digilent BNC connector. Xilinx Spartan-3E 1600E Microblaze
> Development Board has appropriate 6 pin connectors.http://www.digilentinc=
.com/Products/Detail.cfm?NavPath=3D2,401,541&Prod...

Thank you for helpful reply!

Article: 145067
Subject: Re: How to connect two BNC connectors to FPGA board?
From: Alex <victous@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 03:28:01 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Anyway I have noticed that the both - Digilent Pmod BNC connector and
J5 header (which is used for DAC on Xilinx 1600E Microblaze
development kit) are actually male pin connectors - so how to connect
them?! I am puzzled.

Article: 145068
Subject: Re: offset constrain report confusion
From: "realwood" <realwood1119@n_o_s_p_a_m.163.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 05:44:20 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Thanks very much for your reply!

It tell me "all constraint are met", doesn't timing report analyze setup
time and hold time at the same time?

That is to say, if hold time equation doesn't meet, timing report will tell
us offset constraint is "not met", right?	   
					
---------------------------------------		
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com

Article: 145069
Subject: Re: How to connect two BNC connectors to FPGA board?
From: John McCaskill <jhmccaskill@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 06:18:29 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Jan 24, 5:28=A0am, Alex <vict...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anyway I have noticed that the both - Digilent Pmod BNC connector and
> J5 header (which is used for DAC on Xilinx 1600E Microblaze
> development kit) are actually male pin connectors - so how to connect
> them?! I am puzzled.

They come with a cable that has the female connectors at both ends.

Regards,

John McCaskill
www.FasterTechnology.com

Article: 145070
Subject: Re: How to connect two BNC connectors to FPGA board?
From: Alex <victous@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 06:35:53 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On 24 =D1=8F=D0=BD=D0=B2, 16:18, John McCaskill <jhmccask...@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> On Jan 24, 5:28=C2=A0am, Alex <vict...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Anyway I have noticed that the both - Digilent Pmod BNC connector and
> > J5 header (which is used for DAC on Xilinx 1600E Microblaze
> > development kit) are actually male pin connectors - so how to connect
> > them?! I am puzzled.
>
> They come with a cable that has the female connectors at both ends.
>
> Regards,
>
> John McCaskillwww.FasterTechnology.com

agh.. silly me  (thanks anyway!)

Article: 145071
Subject: Re: offset constrain report confusion
From: "kadhiem_ayob" <kadhiem_ayob@n_o_s_p_a_m.yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 10:34:11 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
>Thanks very much for your reply!
>
>It tell me "all constraint are met", doesn't timing report analyze setup
>time and hold time at the same time?
>
>That is to say, if hold time equation doesn't meet, timing report will
tell
>us offset constraint is "not met", right?	   
>					
>---------------------------------------		
>Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com
>

According to ISE definition, input offset is the time of data transition
relative to NEXT clock edge. 
Your setting of 2ns resulted in ISE reporting -3.17ns i.e. ISE now
contradicted its own definition and related it to previous clock edge.
Whichever way you look at it, you got a transition at(6 - (-3.17)) = 2.83
ns with respect to NEXT clock edge, almost centre aligned. I don't expect
volation of setup or hold as reported. Your own addition of 2 + 3.17ns
makes no sense to me. you asked for 2ns and you got 2.83ns

kadhiem	   
					
---------------------------------------		
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com

Article: 145072
Subject: timing properties of fpga devices at sub-clock frequencies
From: "Pallavi" <pallavi_mp@n_o_s_p_a_m.rediffmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 23:25:55 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello,

I need to implement a project as a part of my Masters curriculum using fpga
devices that would generate delays, that is generate higher output
frequencies than the system clock using propagation delays. I'm using ISE
tool for the same. I'm new to this technology and would really appreciate
if i could get some help on this. Thanks in advance.
	   
					
---------------------------------------		
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com

Article: 145073
Subject: Re: timing properties of fpga devices at sub-clock frequencies
From: -jg <jim.granville@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 23:44:04 -0800 (PST)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Jan 25, 6:25=A0pm, "Pallavi" <pallavi_mp@n_o_s_p_a_m.rediffmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I need to implement a project as a part of my Masters curriculum using fp=
ga
> devices that would generate delays, that is generate higher output
> frequencies than the system clock using propagation delays. I'm using ISE
> tool for the same. I'm new to this technology and would really appreciate
> if i could get some help on this. Thanks in advance.
>
> --------------------------------------- =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0
> Posted throughhttp://www.FPGARelated.com

This is a somewhat confused question ?
If you want to generate delays, you do not need to 'over-clock' - just
choose a FPGA with inbuilt delay blocks, and they will have a step
size, much smaller than any clock precision.
ie the FPGA vendors have solved this problem already.

-jg



Article: 145074
Subject: Re: State Machine Initialization in Synplify Pro
From: Martin Thompson <martin.j.thompson@trw.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:13:25 +0000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
John_H <newsgroup@johnhandwork.com> writes:

> On Jan 22, 5:21 am, Martin Thompson <martin.j.thomp...@trw.com> wrote:
>
> Your definition of "better" fits pretty well but there's a little more
> to it.  When there's little consideration made for how the hardware
> behaves with the Verilog tossed towards it, even very readable code
> can be a problem.  Memory inferences want a properly clocked and
> enabled assignment for a single memory write and proper references for
> the memory reads; registers on the read address and/or read values are
> critical for proper implementation in a given target hardware.  Flip-
> flops like single edges and usually either asynchronous set/reset
> controls or synchronous versions, not a mix (though a mix can be
> supported by pushing the synchronous controls behind LUTs into the
> logic).
>
> It's people who have never designed to the hardware level either with
> old TTL chips or coded with a dog-eared, printed copy of an FPGA
> architecture chapter that can produce something that looks okay from a
> software viewpoint - even readable - but will cause problems in clean
> synthesis.
>


Agreed - that's a description I can go with... you have to give the
synth a fighting chance.  "Poor code" can also include describing
behaviour that really doesn't match what you have available.  A bit
like using floating-point code on a fixed-point processor and not
understanding the FP library shenanegins that's going to have to
support you.

Heh - when I look back to my early days VHDLing I use to forget it was
going to end up as hardware - and I used to solder 4000 series CMOS in
my bedroom as a teenager :)  So, yes, code like that

> Clever synthesis tricks can be read, maintained, and debugged with
> ease when done well.  Clever tricks not done well can be "poor" code,
> indeed.
>

Agreed!

>
>> Personally, I'm impressed that I can write a simple description of my
>> logic and get a complicated near-optimal synthesis result out in a
>> large number of cases - I wonder if I'm alone? :)
>
> A "simple description" in my book is one that's clean relative to the
> hardware.  When I see code that's trying to use dual-clocked
> registers, case statements with (unintended) unpopulated states,
> unintended combinatorial latches, abuses of asynchronous data
> transfers or ugly workarounds to match pipelining, things get tough
> for compilers.  But they usually still produce results.
>

Yes, I had not interpreted your "poor code" to cover that sort of
thing at all, but I can entirely see your point there.

> Clean, readable code designed to favor using a heavily loaded signal
> as close to the register as possible too often ends up with several
> levels of LUTs in the critical path despite synthesis timing
> constraints designed to keep those paths short.  Synthesizers decide
> to do things different than the implied coding intent because they're
> smarter.  Really?  Too often I've had to manually piece-up a logic
> cone so the critical paths do what they should have from the beginning.

Maybe I've got luckier there then :)  Apart from that it sounds like
we don't differ as wildly as I implied, sorry!

Cheers,
Martin

-- 
martin.j.thompson@trw.com 
TRW Conekt - Consultancy in Engineering, Knowledge and Technology
http://www.conekt.net/electronics.html



Site Home   Archive Home   FAQ Home   How to search the Archive   How to Navigate the Archive   
Compare FPGA features and resources   

Threads starting:
1994JulAugSepOctNovDec1994
1995JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1995
1996JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1996
1997JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1997
1998JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1998
1999JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1999
2000JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2000
2001JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2001
2002JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2002
2003JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2003
2004JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2004
2005JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2005
2006JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2006
2007JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2007
2008JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2008
2009JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2009
2010JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2010
2011JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2011
2012JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2012
2013JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2013
2014JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2014
2015JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2015
2016JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2016
2017JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2017
2018JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2018
2019JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2019
2020JanFebMarAprMay2020

Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Custom Search