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 110100

Article: 110100
Subject: Re: Nios software IDE
From: Mark McDougall <markm@vl.com.au>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 18:17:54 +1000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Frank van Eijkelenburg wrote:

> Can you tell me what the location of your eclipse workspace is?

DRIVE_ROOT
\_work
  \_project_name
    \_FPG
    | \_software (nios II software)
    | | \_syslib (location of syslib source)
    | | \_application (location of application source)
    | \_synth (location of Quartus source and .PTF)
    \_workspace (workspace directory)

Regards,

-- 
Mark McDougall, Engineer
Virtual Logic Pty Ltd, <http://www.vl.com.au>
21-25 King St, Rockdale, 2216
Ph: +612-9599-3255 Fax: +612-9599-3266

Article: 110101
Subject: Xilinx MicroBlaze 4.00.a source codes released by Xilinx !?
From: "Antti" <Antti.Lukats@xilant.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 02:25:26 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
get from Xilinx website

http://www.xilinx.com/bvdocs/appnotes/xapp730.zip

unzip, then look in /pcores/microblaze_4_00_a/hdl/vhdl

that looks like true unscrambled RTL source of the MicroBlaze !?

Or am I seeing wrong ?

Antti


Article: 110102
Subject: Re: Nios software IDE
From: Frank van Eijkelenburg <someone@work.com.invalid>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 11:31:58 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Mark McDougall wrote:
> Frank van Eijkelenburg wrote:
> 
>> Can you tell me what the location of your eclipse workspace is?
> 
> DRIVE_ROOT
> \_work
>   \_project_name
>     \_FPG
>     | \_software (nios II software)
>     | | \_syslib (location of syslib source)
>     | | \_application (location of application source)
>     | \_synth (location of Quartus source and .PTF)
>     \_workspace (workspace directory)
> 
> Regards,
> 

Many thanks Mark (also for the quick reponse  :) ,

Finally it's working now. I had some conflicts in creating the projects in 
combination with the workspace location.

best regards,
Frank

Article: 110103
Subject: Re: Xilinx MicroBlaze 4.00.a source codes released by Xilinx !?
From: Zara <me_zara@dea.spamcon.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 11:48:49 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On 11 Oct 2006 02:25:26 -0700, "Antti" <Antti.Lukats@xilant.com>
wrote:

>get from Xilinx website
>
>http://www.xilinx.com/bvdocs/appnotes/xapp730.zip
>
>unzip, then look in /pcores/microblaze_4_00_a/hdl/vhdl
>
>that looks like true unscrambled RTL source of the MicroBlaze !?
>
>Or am I seeing wrong ?
>
>Antti


It really seems. Nice!

Zara

Article: 110104
Subject: Re: Quartus II 6.0: System clock has been set back
From: "KJ" <kkjennings@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:59:10 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

"David Brown" <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote in message
news:452c982b$0$16505$8404b019@news.wineasy.se...
>>
>> I believe the reason is that you can convert the "free" edition into
>> the "full" edition by buying a license with no need to do a full
>> reinstall. However, I understand there are some problems with that
>> approach.
>>
>
> Personally, I don't see why they have a licensing system at all, even on
> the full package, or why they charge for the full package.  It would be
> much easier for users if the FPGAs cost very slightly more (to be fair,
> the increase should be on larger FPGAs, and only when bought in small
> quantities), and the software should be free.  I fully understand why
> Altera would like it to be registered in some way, and to track who is
> using it, but letting users use it freely would remove all the hassles
> associated with licensing, node locks, battles with "FlexLM", moving
> computers, and so on.  In recent times I've had a couple of customers
> battle with licensing issues (not with any FPGA-related software) - the
> wasted time and effort has cost far more than the software licenses in the
> first place.

Maybe because there are companies like Synplicity and Mentor Graphics that 
sell tools that are not vendor specific and do not sell parts.  When 
Microsoft bundles things in and 'gives things away' people rant about how 
they drive the independent software vendors out of business....a similar 
argument would likely apply here.

Altera, Xilinx, Synplicity, Mentor Graphics et al pay out hard cash to 
provide software tools and all expect some return on that investment in some 
form (either directly from the tool or indirectly through parts or both). 
If one (or more) of the parts guys gives the tools away it can probably be 
construed by the legal eagles in Washington as a tactic to drive a 
competitor out of business thus deserving of some close and unprofitable 
scrutiny.  Obviously they can get away with giving limited versions of the 
tool away; I'm sure Synp and Ment would prefer to make money off of those as 
well but apparently the perceived loss in revenue is not considered to be 
worth trying to recoup via the legal system, anti-trust laws, that sort of 
approach.

Just my speculation.

KJ




Article: 110105
Subject: Re: longest webcase record
From: "colin" <colin_toogood@yahoo.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 03:26:08 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Austin

I have a coolrunner II with some pins which are functionaly (after
programming) SSTL. I want to perform boundary scan (interconnect)
testing and I want to know whether the CPLD will do it using SSTL or
CMOS logic levels on these pins.

I am aware that CMOS levels will work but for marketing reasons it
would be much better if they were SSTL.

I talked about BSDLANNO because xilinx support said that once a pin is
used as an input or output that is all it will do during boundary scan
but the BSDLANNO documentation and a quick experiment on my part says
otherwise. (I created a design with pinA <= pinB and created a BSDL
file)

I understand why you might think I was talking about the JTAG port
itself but curiously despite a lengthy first email in my webcase they
thought I meant the jtag port as well.

Colin

Austin Lesea wrote:
> Colin,
>
> Are you trying to interface to the JTAG port using SSTL drivers and
> receivers?  If so, then this is an interfacing question (and one that
> can be answered in 60 seconds with a simulator), and really has nothing
> to do with boundary scan at all.
>
> If you post the part family (eg Spartan 3E), and the SSTL interface
> class and supply voltages, I can run the simulation, and see if it works.
> 
> Austin


Article: 110106
Subject: Re: longest webcase record
From: "Antti" <Antti.Lukats@xilant.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 03:31:02 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
daughenbaugh@gmail.com schrieb:

> Ray Andraka wrote:
> > trust me, "Open" is better than "closed" with the notation of something
> > like "will be addressed in next major release".  Once they get a CR
> > assigned, they go into a black hole.
>
> I agree.  But I have an even bigger complaint about the whole webcase
> system.
>
> We use a lot of Xilinx parts, and occasionally we run into problems.
> We generally only use webcase as a last resort, as I hate to clog up
> their system with simple cases.  So sometimes we find a problem and a
> work-around ourselves.  This information should be valuable to Xilinx,
> so I open a case to tell them this.  My frustration is that the basic
> response is "So you have a work-around?  Case closed!"  This info goes
> into the same black hole.
>
> My most recent example:
>
> We are using a lot of spartan 3E parts, with the BPI mode configuration
> - which is awesome for our application.  The early parts (stepping 0)
> had an issue where JTAG configuration would fail if the FPGA is set to
> BPI mode and the attached memory had a valid bitstream.  The datasheet
> says that this has been fixed in stepping 1.  We have never had any
> stepping 0 devices so we ignored this issue, but it turns out that it
> is still present in stepping 1.  This wasted a lot of our time until we
> figured out what was going on.  Xilinx has two suggested work arounds,
> which both work, but weren't good for our application.  Now we are in
> production and the JTAG interface is not needed (as it was used for
> development only), so this is no longer an issue for us.  I figured
> that Xilinx would like to know that this issue was not fixed in
> stepping 1, and that they still have an issue with their silicon, so I
> opened a webcase.  But I basically got the response I mentioned
> previously:
> "So this isn't a problem for you?  Case Closed!"
>
> I opened the case in August, and the engineer ran an example design
> himself and then ended the case with:
>
> "I let the Spartan group know that this problem still exists in
> Stepping 1 parts. They are looking into why this is not fixed. Since
> you are ok with the workaround and expressed that this is not a
> problem. I am going to go ahead and close this case. Please feel free
> to open up additional cases if need be. Thank you."
>
> No, it isn't a problem for us, anymore, but there should be some sort
> of errata posted ASAP so that other customers do not run into the same
> problems we did.  I gave it some time, but I still don't see anything,
> so I am posting here.
>
> Xilinx's system is broken, as they have no good means for customer
> feedback.  So I am hoping that comp.arch.fpga might work better than
> webcase?
>
> Jason Daughenbaugh
> http://www.advanced.pro

JTAG BPI S3E issue - there is a solution that fixes the problem
the external flash memory can be put into status read mode using
CFI commands and boundary scan, then the JTAG can be used to
work with the FPGA as if there S3e bug wasnt there. Its a bit tricky
but working solution.

Antti


Article: 110107
Subject: Q on sync resets (yes, again!)
From: John <bogus@bogus.ema>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 11:07:20 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi,

With all this talk of sync resets, I was curious:

1.  If you apply reset async and de-assert sync, does this signal 
automatically get distributed using the FPGA's global reset resources 
(GSR for Xilinx, Global for Altera)?  Are there any hidden gremlins with 
this technique (aside from not filtering glitches on the reset input 
pin) ?

2. Do all modern FPGAs have flops with synchronous reset inputs?  Or 
does it even matter?  I'm thinking in the case of a purely synchronous 
reset, you might want to avoid any nebulousness by NOT using the async 
reset, even if your reset signal is fully synchronized.

John.

Article: 110108
Subject: Re: Xilinx MicroBlaze 4.00.a source codes released by Xilinx !?
From: "Jon Beniston" <jon@beniston.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 04:08:56 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Zara wrote:
> On 11 Oct 2006 02:25:26 -0700, "Antti" <Antti.Lukats@xilant.com>
> wrote:
>
> >get from Xilinx website
> >
> >http://www.xilinx.com/bvdocs/appnotes/xapp730.zip
> >
> >unzip, then look in /pcores/microblaze_4_00_a/hdl/vhdl
> >
> >that looks like true unscrambled RTL source of the MicroBlaze !?
> >
> >Or am I seeing wrong ?
> >
> >Antti
>
>
> It really seems. Nice!
>

So, will someone be getting a telling off later today, or are Xilinx
following Lattice's lead?

Cheers,
Jon


Article: 110109
Subject: Re: a clueless bloke tells Xilinx to get a move on
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 11 Oct 2006 04:12:41 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Brannon wrote:
> 7.	Is Xilinx making its money on software or hardware? If it is not
> making money on software, then consider making it open source. More
> eyes on the code mean more speed.

This is not just a Xilinx problem. Across the industry slow poor tools
have resulted from tight fisted IP policies regarding FPGA internal
design and routing data bases to build bit streams. High cost, low
performance.

And it means the tools are limited by the creativity and (lack of)
experience of the vendors in house tools programmers. A mix of NIH and
paranioa over disclosure are self defeating in selling FPGA chips in
high volume. We hear complaints by the vendor that they don't have
unlimited resources and must focus on selected key customer needs (AKA
high volume customers demands). This same lack of resources has
prevented innovative redesign of the tools to take advantage of
multicore processors and cluster technologies.

More importantly, the vendor doesn't have a broad systems view of their
own products, and has failed to capitalize on building low cost design
systems which are representive of the very market they are feeding ....
FPGA centric designs. Consider that a well executed motherboard built
around multiple FPGA's with PPC CPU cores could easily have far more
place and route performance than any equivalently priced PC workstation
by using the FPGA's as high speed parallel coprocessing routing
engines.  This isn't a new idea .... see
http://www.cs.caltech.edu/research/ic/pdf/fastroute_fpga2003.pdf

That they block both 3rd parties and open source from having access to
the FPGA internals and tools internals means their customers are
limited to what tools their limited resource development teams can
cobble togather.

With a more open disclosure, it would be interesting to see what both
open source and for-profit 3rd parties could do to make a market out of
providing high performance FPGA tools and integrated development
systems with FPGA assisted routing.


Article: 110110
Subject: Re: Xilinx MicroBlaze 4.00.a source codes released by Xilinx !?
From: "Amontec, Larry" <laurent.gauch@ANTI-SPAMamontec.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:30:51 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Antti wrote:

> get from Xilinx website
> 
> http://www.xilinx.com/bvdocs/appnotes/xapp730.zip
> 
> unzip, then look in /pcores/microblaze_4_00_a/hdl/vhdl
> 
> that looks like true unscrambled RTL source of the MicroBlaze !?
> 
> Or am I seeing wrong ?
> 
> Antti
> 

Yes it is as the RTL VHDL source of the  Xilinx Microblaze.
Publish Error from Xilinx ?

Regards,
Laurent
________________________
Amontec
http://www.amontec.com
New JTAG solution: JTAGkey-Tiny @ €29.-

Article: 110111
Subject: Re: ARMv6 ISA doc required plz help
From: "Jon Beniston" <jon@beniston.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 04:37:07 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

vittal wrote:
> Hi ,
> I need either the ARMv6 ISA or the ARMv7-A ISA doc.
> Please help

http://www.arm.com/documentation/ 

Cheers,
Jon


Article: 110112
Subject: Re: ARMv6 ISA doc required plz help
From: "vits" <vittal.patil@gmail.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 04:44:27 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hey man I already tried it.
but i couldnt get any detailed ISA. I got only quick reference cards.
and many links are not working ,they are broken links.
Jon Beniston wrote:
> vittal wrote:
> > Hi ,
> > I need either the ARMv6 ISA or the ARMv7-A ISA doc.
> > Please help
> 
> http://www.arm.com/documentation/ 
> 
> Cheers,
> Jon


Article: 110113
Subject: Re: FPGA to SRAM port interface
From: "oen_br" <oen_no_spam@yahoo.com.br>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 04:46:00 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
David,

I don't have the hardware yet, so, I'm just doing simulations. It will
take more 3 to 4 months for the prototype board, but I'm trying to
catch early designs faults. (Actually I'm doing everything, hardware,
software and pre-layout, and a lot of times I have to stop and do other
things!)
At simulations, it worked (using auxiliary signals as that LOAD_ADDR),
but I want a robust, clear and as simple as possible design. So I asked
for some guide lines/ideias.
I'll share the results when I have them.

Luiz Carlos


Article: 110114
Subject: Re: Two instances of Microblaze ...
From: "Göran Bilski" <goran.bilski@xilinx.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:15:07 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi Mordehay,

I haven't tried this myself but you should be able to import two EDK system 
into a ISE project.
You can't have two .bmm but you could merge them into a common .bmm.
In a .bmm file there is the hierarchical path to the BRAMs so they should be 
possible to merge as long the paths are different.

Göran

<me_2003@walla.co.il> wrote in message 
news:1160487896.970522.203900@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Hi Goran,
I did not understood your answer..
Do you mean that I need to create a system which contains two
microblaze instances and afterwards export it to the ISE ?

What if I want to have these two microblazes in two different systems
and afterwards export them to ISE separately (my top.vhd will contain
two system (microblaze) instances ? Can I do it ? Can I use two BMM
files in that case ?

Thanks in advance, Mordehay.


Göran Bilski wrote:
> Just add the 2nd MicroBlaze in the XPS tool.
>
> Göran Bilski
>
> <me_2003@walla.co.il> wrote in message
> news:1160296753.788965.57640@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> > Hi all,
> > I have a microblaze processor that I've built using the EDK and
> > afterwards simulated and it seems to work fine. Now I need to make two
> > instances of this Microblaze system in my design.
> > Can I use the same module and instantiate it twice or I maybe I need to
> > make a copy of the system and name it differently. If I instance the
> > same module twice I figured out that it will be problematic to fill the
> > BRAM with code data.
> > Can anyone help ?
> > Thanks, Mordehay.
> >



Article: 110115
Subject: Re: FPGA to SRAM port interface
From: "oen_br" <oen_no_spam@yahoo.com.br>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 05:19:02 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

> process(ALE, WRITE#)
>   if (ALE = '1') then
>     addr <= dtadd;
>   elsif  rising_edge(WRITE#)   then
>     addr <= addr + 1;
>   end if;
> end process;

Marlboro,

This means that the CLB storage must have flip-flop and latch behavior
at the same time, and I think it's not possible. When it's a flip-flop
you can have preset/clear input, but it is preset or clear. Well,
looking at the datasheet I found that "rev" input, I need to read more
about it.

Luiz Carlos


Article: 110116
Subject: Re: Quartus II 6.0: System clock has been set back
From: "radarman" <jshamlet@gmail.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 05:24:05 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
KJ wrote:
> "David Brown" <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote in message
> news:452c982b$0$16505$8404b019@news.wineasy.se...
> >>
> >> I believe the reason is that you can convert the "free" edition into
> >> the "full" edition by buying a license with no need to do a full
> >> reinstall. However, I understand there are some problems with that
> >> approach.
> >>
> >
> > Personally, I don't see why they have a licensing system at all, even on
> > the full package, or why they charge for the full package.  It would be
> > much easier for users if the FPGAs cost very slightly more (to be fair,
> > the increase should be on larger FPGAs, and only when bought in small
> > quantities), and the software should be free.  I fully understand why
> > Altera would like it to be registered in some way, and to track who is
> > using it, but letting users use it freely would remove all the hassles
> > associated with licensing, node locks, battles with "FlexLM", moving
> > computers, and so on.  In recent times I've had a couple of customers
> > battle with licensing issues (not with any FPGA-related software) - the
> > wasted time and effort has cost far more than the software licenses in the
> > first place.
>
> Maybe because there are companies like Synplicity and Mentor Graphics that
> sell tools that are not vendor specific and do not sell parts.  When
> Microsoft bundles things in and 'gives things away' people rant about how
> they drive the independent software vendors out of business....a similar
> argument would likely apply here.
>
> Altera, Xilinx, Synplicity, Mentor Graphics et al pay out hard cash to
> provide software tools and all expect some return on that investment in some
> form (either directly from the tool or indirectly through parts or both).
> If one (or more) of the parts guys gives the tools away it can probably be
> construed by the legal eagles in Washington as a tactic to drive a
> competitor out of business thus deserving of some close and unprofitable
> scrutiny.  Obviously they can get away with giving limited versions of the
> tool away; I'm sure Synp and Ment would prefer to make money off of those as
> well but apparently the perceived loss in revenue is not considered to be
> worth trying to recoup via the legal system, anti-trust laws, that sort of
> approach.
>
> Just my speculation.
>
> KJ

I believe it is a bit more strategic than that. Consider that Microsoft
practically gives away Windows and Office to universities, with the
expectation that most of those new grads will have used the software
during their studies.

Now, consider those same college students when they get to the point
where buying decisions are made. Will they go with Microsoft products,
or something else?

No, I think Altera and Xilinx give away the low-end stuff so that
students and hobbiests will get exposure to their products. After all,
if the price of entry is > $3k, how many college's, much less students,
will be able to provide a reasonable number of seats to do FPGA
designs? Also, the best students are going to want to do some work at
home, and most are certainly NOT going to be able to afford the full
Quartus or ISE package. With both Xilinx and Altera giving away low-end
versions of the software, those students can now choose either, or
both, to try out at home. The cost of development boards becomes the
next issue. (Xilinx is still winning this one)

Thus, the free software is almost a promotional expense for the FPGA
vendors. It gives people a taste of what's available, and (hopefully)
gives the users a good impression.

Perhaps it's better that they have the same licensing restrictions in a
sense. It prevents perception problems later, when you have a real
license, and can't move it between PC's.


Article: 110117
Subject: Release Status of Spartan3E
From: Uwe Bonnes <bon@hertz.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:14:03 +0000 (UTC)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello,

a look at the Xilinx "online" shop or other Xilinx sources shows that the
Product line of Spartan 3E still shows gaps. While e.g. the datasheet shows
both the XC3S100E and XC3S250E planned in TQ144, only the XC3S100E is
available yet. Same for 250/500 in PQ208. This defeats migration from one
size to another.

Is there any (reliable) roadmap when the gaps will be filled?

Something like TI's product pages, showing inventory and production status,
would be highly welcome!

Thanks

-- 
Uwe Bonnes                bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik  Schlossgartenstrasse 9  64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

Article: 110118
Subject: Re: Two instances of Microblaze ...
From: "Antti" <Antti.Lukats@xilant.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 06:15:35 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
G=F6ran Bilski schrieb:

> Hi Mordehay,
>
> I haven't tried this myself but you should be able to import two EDK syst=
em
> into a ISE project.
> You can't have two .bmm but you could merge them into a common .bmm.
> In a .bmm file there is the hierarchical path to the BRAMs so they should=
 be
> possible to merge as long the paths are different.
>
> G=F6ran

If you just add two XPS instances to ISE then it says:
"Two instances detected, only one is allowed" and doesnt proceed.

this is when you use normal flow where you just have XPS system
as submodule in ISE

if you add the stub.vhd manually (And not the XMP file) maybe it
want complain so much then

Antti


Article: 110119
Subject: Re: Release Status of Spartan3E
From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@airmail.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 08:30:05 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
> a look at the Xilinx "online" shop or other Xilinx sources shows that the
> Product line of Spartan 3E still shows gaps. While e.g. the datasheet 
> shows
> both the XC3S100E and XC3S250E planned in TQ144, only the XC3S100E is
> available yet. Same for 250/500 in PQ208. This defeats migration from one
> size to another.

The 250K gate in PQ208 is shipping, I have 100 of them sitting here in a 
box.

Paul S.



Article: 110120
Subject: Re: longest webcase record
From: daughenbaugh@gmail.com
Date: 11 Oct 2006 06:31:39 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Antti wrote:
> JTAG BPI S3E issue - there is a solution that fixes the problem
> the external flash memory can be put into status read mode using
> CFI commands and boundary scan, then the JTAG can be used to
> work with the FPGA as if there S3e bug wasnt there. Its a bit tricky
> but working solution.

I like your solution.  Clever!

Does this mean that you ran into this problem too?  Do you see it with
Stepping 1 as well?

Jason


Article: 110121
Subject: Re: FPGA to SRAM port interface
From: "Marlboro" <ccon67@netscape.net>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 06:32:38 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

oen_br wrote:
> > process(ALE, WRITE#)
> >   if (ALE = '1') then
> >     addr <= dtadd;
> >   elsif  rising_edge(WRITE#)   then
> >     addr <= addr + 1;
> >   end if;
> > end process;
>
> Marlboro,
>
> This means that the CLB storage must have flip-flop and latch behavior
> at the same time, and I think it's not possible. When it's a flip-flop
> you can have preset/clear input, but it is preset or clear. Well,
> looking at the datasheet I found that "rev" input, I need to read more
> about it.
>
> Luiz Carlos

Good point, I guess the synthesizer  will "decode" the combine logic of
dtadd & ALE and feed outputs to async R/P of the flipflops...

For example R(0) = ALE and not(dtadd(0)),  P(0) = ALE and dtadd(0)...


Article: 110122
Subject: Re: a clueless bloke tells Xilinx to get a move on
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 11 Oct 2006 07:07:30 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Brannon wrote:
> 7.	Is Xilinx making its money on software or hardware? If it is not
> making money on software, then consider making it open source. More
> eyes on the code mean more speed.

As a side note, it's not either/or between being a hardware or software
company.

Most major Open Source products are staffed with paid developers from
multiple supporting For-Profit companies to leverage industry
development dollars as far as possible. Linux exists as a viable
commercial product because of hundreds of millions of dollars in
salaries paid by many (MANY) large hardware and software corporations
to develop the product.

They did this to get out of the other extreme, which is everyone having
a mediocre product due to limited development dolars because everyone
was reinventing the same wheel, and claiming theirs was somehow better.
A For-Profit project (UNIX) changed that model, and had everyone
supporting a common UNIX development goal, which over time, out grew
UNIX and became OpenSource in a number of UNIX clone forms.

Pooling paid labor from both FPGA/PLD companies, and major end user
companies with inhouse EDA programmers, plus educational and volunteer
labor does over time generate a better product. Mostly because of the
professional paid developers that are mutually committed to making it
the best for THIER companies use and sale.


Article: 110123
Subject: Re: Quartus II 6.0: System clock has been set back
From: "fp" <fpga002006@yahoo.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 07:14:14 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Ben Twijnstra wrote:
> Michael Kraemer wrote:
>
> > Actually I cannot understand why Altera is so generous to give away
> > this software for free, which I appreciate a lot, and then attach such
> > restrictions. Anyway, this is perhaps the wrong question if one gets
> > something for free.
> >
>
> Well, it's not entirely Altera's fault. The FlexLM license software they
> _link_ (i.e. they don't have the source code) in has a function that
> queries the validity of a certain feature name based on the feature name,
> the current date, software version etc. The linked-in FlexLM bit then
> refuses to validate _ANY_ feature if the system clock has been set back,
> and there you go.
>
> On the other hand, many customer calling me with this problem tend to find
> some bug in their overall system (network, application, whatever), so from
> a sysadmin standpoint it could actually be positive that this check is
> there (ducks and runs).
>
> In the past I have questioned Altera Tools Marketing's decision to have a
> license check in the Free Edition at all, but I do understand their reasons
> for it - they want to know which sites are active and which ones are not.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Ben

Also, when the Quartus web edition is "free," my license file is only
good for 6 months and must renew it afterwards.  I guess Altera can
pull the plug any time if they decide to do so.

S. C.


Article: 110124
Subject: Re: Quartus II 6.0: System clock has been set back
From: "fp" <fpga002006@yahoo.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2006 07:15:19 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Ben Twijnstra wrote:
> Michael Kraemer wrote:
>
> > Actually I cannot understand why Altera is so generous to give away
> > this software for free, which I appreciate a lot, and then attach such
> > restrictions. Anyway, this is perhaps the wrong question if one gets
> > something for free.
> >
>
> Well, it's not entirely Altera's fault. The FlexLM license software they
> _link_ (i.e. they don't have the source code) in has a function that
> queries the validity of a certain feature name based on the feature name,
> the current date, software version etc. The linked-in FlexLM bit then
> refuses to validate _ANY_ feature if the system clock has been set back,
> and there you go.
>
> On the other hand, many customer calling me with this problem tend to find
> some bug in their overall system (network, application, whatever), so from
> a sysadmin standpoint it could actually be positive that this check is
> there (ducks and runs).
>
> In the past I have questioned Altera Tools Marketing's decision to have a
> license check in the Free Edition at all, but I do understand their reasons
> for it - they want to know which sites are active and which ones are not.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Ben

Also, when the Quartus web edition is "free," my license file is only
good for 6 months and must renew it afterwards.  I guess Altera can
pull the plug any time if they decide to do so.

S. C.




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