Custom Search
Site Home Archive Home FAQ Home How to search the Archive How to Navigate the Archive
Compare FPGA features and resources
Threads starting:
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
"default@user.com" wrote: > > > Sounds like you missed the mark on the shifter. An 8 bit barrel shift (fully > > populated) should occupy 24 4-LUTs and should be 3 levels of logic deep. You > > have to implement it, the tools will not infer the correct structure by > > themselves. > > Hi, the Xilinx XC4xxx library (the library that comes with Foundation > 1.5) includes an 8-bit barrel shifter. I played around with this macro, > and have concluded its more like a 'bit rotater.' Opening the macro in > the schematic editor indeed shows 24 2:1 muxes, arranged as 8bits x > 3deep. > > The block in question, however, is an ARITHMETIC shifter. I guess you > could call it a barrel-shifter + sign-extender. I did a bit of > preliminary work writing structural verilog (before, I had a for-loop > inside an always@() block), the structural verilog implementation > ultimately synthesized to the same bloated FPGA map. > > I'll go and try it again, though. My structural verilog did not use any > kind of 'barrel' structure (bit-rotate), so that's the next thing to > try. You might try the equivalent of three sequential IF (or the verilog equivalent) structures. Each one should be controlled by one bit of the shift size vector. The output of each level of IF should feed the input of the next level. A FOR loop will give you N levels of 2 to 1 muxes without using the optimization available from sharing levels. If you need more speed, you can pipeline the muxes by registering each level. if (sel(0) = '1') then stageA <= input(7) & input(7 downto 1); else stageA <= input(7 downto 0); end if; if (sel(1) = '1') then stageB <= stageA(7) & stageA(7) & stageA(7 downto 2); else stageB <= stageA(7 downto 0); end if; if (sel(2) = '1') then stageC <= stageB(7) & stageB(7) & stageB(7) & stageB(7) & stageB(7 downto 4); else stageC <= stageB(7 downto 0); end if; Output <= stageC; This is VHDL, but you get the idea. Three levels, 8 muxes at each level, 24 4LUTs. -- Rick Collins rick.collins@XYarius.com Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY removed. Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company Specializing in DSP and FPGA design Arius 4 King Ave Frederick, MD 21701-3110 301-682-7772 Voice 301-682-7666 FAX Internet URL http://www.arius.comArticle: 25876
A barrel shift and a programmed arithmetic shift are the same circuit other than the connections at the ends of the shift. In the barrel inputs that would come off one end are connected from the other end, in the arithmetic, they are connected to the sign, and in a logical to zero. It would be a fairly trivial modification if you could get into the source on the cores. "default@user.com" wrote: > > Hi, the Xilinx XC4xxx library (the library that comes with Foundation > 1.5) includes an 8-bit barrel shifter. I played around with this macro, > and have concluded its more like a 'bit rotater.' Opening the macro in > the schematic editor indeed shows 24 2:1 muxes, arranged as 8bits x > 3deep. > > The block in question, however, is an ARITHMETIC shifter. I guess you > could call it a barrel-shifter + sign-extender. I did a bit of > preliminary work writing structural verilog (before, I had a for-loop > inside an always@() block), the structural verilog implementation > ultimately synthesized to the same bloated FPGA map. > > I'll go and try it again, though. My structural verilog did not use any > kind of 'barrel' structure (bit-rotate), so that's the next thing to > try. > -- -Ray Andraka, P.E. President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 email ray@andraka.com http://www.andraka.com or http://www.fpga-guru.comArticle: 25877
Hi, "Peter Alfke" <palfke@earthlink.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:39CD6787.2A93CB66@earthlink.net... > ... > What you descibe is not tristate, but rather a weak latching action ( we > at Xilinx call it "weak keeper") which prevents floating inputs and > undefined levels, but does not guarantee a specific logic level. As you > describe it, the pin becomes either a 1 or a 0, depending on the last > drive, internal or external. > > Peter Alfke > That sounds to be perhaps the better description for this state, but I wouldn't believe, that the Infineon processor could not drive against this "weak keeper", as you don't need a lower resistor than 100KOhm to change the level at the I/O Pin... It's curious, that the C167 seems to ignore, that he has to start it's bootstrap loader... CU, CarlhermannArticle: 25878
I'm doing a board with a Xilinx Spartan II (XC2S150) and have provided places for both a XC17S150XL and a XC18V01S20 config prom. Am I being overly paranoid? -- Gary Watson gary2@nexsan.com Nexsan Technologies Ltd. Derby DE21 7BF ENGLAND http://www.nexsan.comArticle: 25879
"Guest Internet User" <INVALID@INVALID.NET> wrote in message > Does anyone know if this is the same software as the standalone Xilinx > Student Edition 2.1i by Prentice Hall? Seems like the standalone > package is hard to find. See http://vig.prenhall.com/academic/product/1,3411,0130289078,00.html. You can order a copy of this standalone software from fatbrain.com, which reports it to be "in stock". Amazon.com says "4-6 weeks". Xess.com says "in stock". ISBN: 0-13-028907-8. The significantly-cheaper $55 Student Ed. 2.1i appears to target the XCV50 and therefore the bit-compatible XC2S50 (about $13 q1), making Virtex development much more accessible to budget conscious designers. And it's perfectly adequate for developing and testing reusable Virtex IP cores, including processors, for subsequent integration into larger Virtex/E/II designs (which require the professional tools). We're in for lots of fun -- and some astonishing student projects. See www.fpgacpu.org/teaching.html. Hats off to Xilinx and Prentice-Hall. Thanks to products like this, I think we will witness more new processor, signal processing, and SoC designs in the next two years than in the entire history of computers. Alas, unlike the 1.3 and 1.5 editions, the 2.1i edition does not seem to bundle the "Practical Xilinx Designer Lab Book" by Dave Vanden Bout. That book, together with an XS40 board and XSTOOLS, is a great, Xilinx tools-focused, hands-on introduction to digital design with FPGAs -- which is why I built my tutorial works to that platform. Jan Gray Gray Research LLCArticle: 25880
Hi, I'll be there. Even on a panel discussion about "PLD Hardware and Software in High-Rel, High-Safety, and High-Security Mission-Critical Environment" on Wednesday. What a mouthful! See ya there Peter Alfke Ray Andraka wrote: > Hey Peter, > > Are we going to see you at MAPLD this week, or are you weaseling out of this one > too? I'll be there! > > Peter Alfke wrote: > > > > Carlhermann Schlehaus wrote: > > > > ? ALTERA has weak pull up resistors on their I/O Pins, which > > ? are active when the FPGA is not configured (C167CR could be > > ? configured by Bootstrap Loader) and which are activated for > > ? tri-state I/O Pins. > > ? I've tested them by trying to force 5V and 0V with a 100KOhm > > ? resistor. The pin stays on the voltage, which was applied > > ? by this 100K resistor, thus I really would say these Pins are > > ? tristated... > > > > What you descibe is not tristate, but rather a weak latching action ( we > > at Xilinx call it "weak keeper") which prevents floating inputs and > > undefined levels, but does not guarantee a specific logic level. As you > > describe it, the pin becomes either a 1 or a 0, depending on the last > > drive, internal or external. > > > > Peter Alfke > > -- > -Ray Andraka, P.E. > President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. > 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 > email ray@andraka.com > http://www.andraka.com or http://www.fpga-guru.comArticle: 25881
Carlhermann Schlehaus wrote: > That sounds to be perhaps the better description for this state, > but I wouldn't believe, that the Infineon processor could not > drive against this "weak keeper", as you don't need a lower > resistor than 100KOhm to change the level at the I/O Pin... > > It's curious, that the C167 seems to ignore, that he has to > start it's bootstrap loader... > Obviously, the uP can drive successfully against this. But what if the uP uses this signal just as an input? Peter AlfkeArticle: 25882
Hi Peter, "Peter Alfke" <palfke@earthlink.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:39CE4798.CBDDB75E@earthlink.net... > > ... > > Obviously, the uP can drive successfully against this. > But what if the uP uses this signal just as an input? All Pins, which are sampled at startup by the uP to determine the user-defined startup or bus mode are terminated with pull-ups or pull-downs... Thus I'm meanwhile thinking, there is another pin involved, which is not mentioned in the databook of the uP. CU, CSArticle: 25883
Hi All, I'm trying to figure out a buffering strategy for doing a 20 bit to 64 bit bus conversion and vice versa. I've come up with something simple like storing 32 20bit transactions and then doing a copy to a 640 bit register and then performing 10 64bit transactions. Unfortunately I don't like this solution as it's not that elegant. Does anyone out there kow of a better way to do this ? TIA AnoopArticle: 25884
In article <P7yz5.290839$1h3.6391493@news20.bellglobal.com>, "Anoop Nannra" <anoop.nannra@sympatico.ca> wrote: > Hi All, > > I'm trying to figure out a buffering strategy for doing a 20 bit to 64 bit > bus conversion and vice versa. > > I've come up with something simple like storing 32 20bit transactions and > then doing a copy to a 640 bit register and then performing 10 64bit > transactions. Unfortunately I don't like this solution as it's not that > elegant. Does anyone out there kow of a better way to do this ? > > TIA > > Anoop > > Anoop, There are several ways to proceed. Which one to choose depends on the data rate relative to device clock speed. If the incoming word rate is < 1/20 the device's clock speed, then you can serialize the data in a 20-bit shift register and shift it into a 64-bit shift register. Double buffering will be needed on each shift register, but this is a very small circuit. You can deal with data up to 1/4 the device's clock speed by using a 4-bit-wide shift register for the above trick, loading the 4 bits in parallel into a 5-nibble-long input shift register feeding a 16--nibble-long output shift register that feeds a 64-bit wide output holding register. If your input rate is faster than that, then a 64-bit wide 5-input multiplexer with the proper nibble steering logic is required. Triple buffering of the output is needed - one 64-bit register to hold the last complwted output word, and a double 64-bit construction register since a 20-bit word may straddle two 64-bit words. If there is not an extra clock period available to do the straddling, then yo need more mux bits for these cases. The control for this is a state machine that sequences thru the output registers in 20-bit steps. It controls which 20 bits of the two construction registers are enabled to receive data, and tells the muxes which input data goes into each 4-bit nibble of these registers. There are 16 states in this machine, assuming that input data changes on every clock. --David Forbes Tucson AZ Change spamnet to starnet before replying.Article: 25885
Hi. I'm not sure what exactly you're trying to do, but I'll take a stab at it. I'm assuming that you can't afford to waste any write operations to the 20- bit bus. ie, When you write (4x20=80) bits using 4 cycles, you need the bottom 64 bits to go to cycle n of OUT(63..0), and then the remaining 16 bits to go to cycle n+1 of OUT(15..0)? I would do the following. Have a small state machine/counter at the input stage that tells you what 20-bit write you're on. That counter resets itself once you've written 320 bits, which is 16 cycles. This fits nicely into a 4-bit counter. Use a 64-bit register, and the 4 bits of the counter to control an input mux, and the write enables. Consider (Where OUT is your 64-bit register): Counter Value OUT Bits 0 19..0 1 39..20 2 59..40 3 63..60, 15..0 4 35..16 5 55..36 6 63..56, 11..0 7 31..12 8 51..32 9 63..52, 7..0 A 27..8 B 47..28 C 63..48, 3..0 D 23..4 E 43..24 F 63..44 This gives you 16 different write enables, one for every 4 bits of OUT. Then, for example, the Write enable for OUT(3..0) is when your counter is equal to [0, 3, 6, 9, or C]. The WE for OUT(40..43) is when the counter is equal to [2, 5, 8, B, or E]. The input MUX will work much the same way, using the counter to control the input to each 4-bit block of your OUT register. For example, consider OUT[3..0]. This section of your output register gets the following data at the following counter values: Counter Bits to OUT(3..0) 0 IN(3..0) 3 IN(7..4) 6 IN(11..8) 9 IN(15..12) C IN(19..16) The other values of the counter don't matter for bits OUT[3..0], so optimize your counter accordingly. Hope this helps. -Kent anoop.nannra@sympatico.ca (Anoop Nannra) wrote in >I'm trying to figure out a buffering strategy for doing a 20 bit to 64 bit >bus conversion and vice versa. > >I've come up with something simple like storing 32 20bit transactions and >then doing a copy to a 640 bit register and then performing 10 64bit >transactions. Unfortunately I don't like this solution as it's not that >elegant. Does anyone out there kow of a better way to do this ? > >TIA > >Anoop > > >Article: 25886
I am currently using 2 chips to produce a PCM coded DTMF stream and was trying to replace it with a Xilinx fpga that was already in the design for other reasons. My solution was to store the pre-calculated PCM code on ROM and tasked the CPU to load up a series of 8-bit PCM registers on FPGA before initiating the transmission. The FPGA will continously loop through the registers to transmit the PCM code. However I realised it took about 50% of the FPGA resources to implement a sequence of 50 registers of the 40k gate FPGA. This is much lower than the available 3k RAM available. Is this the norm? If so, how can we get 3k RAM out of the FPGA? I implemented the design in VHDL and inferred the RAM using array. Regards, Neo Wei ThiamArticle: 25887
instead of using 31i sp2 you also can download the JTAG programmer of the latest WEBpack - Tools Peter chadlamb@my-deja.com schrieb in Nachricht <8qgli1$m3$1@nnrp1.deja.com>... >Make sure you are using the 31i, sp2 or later. We came across the same >problem. They had screwed up the software. We didn't have to do >anything to pins to get it to work, just update your software. > > >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ >Before you buy.Article: 25888
I'm about to order bits to build a PC for FPGA simulation/ compilation/PAR. I'm going for a 750M Althlone Thunderbird on an Asus A7V motherboard with 256M memory (to start), a 15G IBM ATA100 hard drive with a Yamaha 8x8x24 CD-WR for project documentation. Any comments? I've been thinking about buying a Matrox G400 video card with dual output as I was thinking that it would be very handy to be able to view a modelsim wave window on one monitor, with all the other modelsim windows on another one. Has anyone tried this? I know that windows98 supports dual monitors, but does the application software have to support them too, or does it jut create more desktop on the second one? Thanks for any advice. Nial Stewart.Article: 25889
You might want to check out the new FPSLIC (AVR+RAM+Peripherals+FPGA). You have 40k gates of FPGA. In addition, you have 12kx8 SRAM accessible from the FPGA. On top of that you have 2kB distributed SRAM -- Best regards, ulf at atmel dot com The contents of this message is intended to be my private opinion and may or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Sweden "Neo Wei Thiam" <neowt@cet.st.com.sg> wrote in message news:ee6e179.-1@WebX.sUN8CHnE... > I am currently using 2 chips to produce a PCM coded DTMF stream and was trying to replace it with a Xilinx fpga that was already in the design for other reasons. > > My solution was to store the pre-calculated PCM code on ROM and tasked the CPU to load up a series of 8-bit PCM registers on FPGA before initiating the transmission. The FPGA will continously loop through the registers to transmit the PCM code. > > However I realised it took about 50% of the FPGA resources to implement a sequence of 50 registers of the 40k gate FPGA. This is much lower than the available 3k RAM available. > > Is this the norm? If so, how can we get 3k RAM out of the FPGA? > I implemented the design in VHDL and inferred the RAM using array. > > Regards, > > Neo Wei ThiamArticle: 25890
I have a dual-screen Matrox, and Foundation 3.1i works mostly, but some of the drop-down boxes don't work if you have it on the secondary display. Generally, I find that most software behaves ok, but things like OrCAD have some surprising behaviors. If you have a problem, it's best not to maximize its window -- software seems to jump to the conclusion that it "owns" the entire display subsystem when maximized. Make sure you download the latest drivers from the Matrox web site. The ones on the CD, straight from Matrox, are over a year old! -- Gary Watson gary2@nexsan.com Nexsan Technologies Ltd. Derby DE21 7BF ENGLAND http://www.nexsan.com "Nial Stewart" <nials@sqf.hp.com> wrote in message news:39CF2910.2DB1EC75@sqf.hp.com... > I'm about to order bits to build a PC for FPGA simulation/ > compilation/PAR. > > I'm going for a 750M Althlone Thunderbird on an Asus A7V motherboard > with > 256M memory (to start), a 15G IBM ATA100 hard drive with a > Yamaha 8x8x24 CD-WR for project documentation. > > Any comments? > > I've been thinking about buying a Matrox G400 video card with > dual output as I was thinking that it would be very handy to > be able to view a modelsim wave window on one monitor, with > all the other modelsim windows on another one. > > Has anyone tried this? I know that windows98 supports dual > monitors, but does the application software have to support > them too, or does it jut create more desktop on the second one? > > Thanks for any advice. > > Nial Stewart. >Article: 25891
Paul Smith <ptsmith@indiana.edu> writes:
> These problems and more are covered on the Xilinx support web site.
> They have a different installer you can download, and mention they will
> not use the web based installer for future versions. Good!!!!!!
I'm very glad to here that! I can't see why they want the customers to
open up security holes and require netscape, java, and javascript only
to extract a few files.
Petter
--
________________________________________________________________________
Petter Gustad 8'h2B | (~8'h2B) - Hamlet http://www.gustad.com
#include <stdio.h>/* compile/run this program to get my email address */
int main(void) {printf ("petter\100gustad\056com\nmy opinions only\n");}
Article: 25892Hi Tomek, Can you describe how you did the 'implementation'? How did you write your source code since your test bench works only for behavioural simulation? (Did you use behavioural synthesis??) If you write your source code at RTL level it should be very easy to write a test bench that works without change both for the source code and the back annotated netlist - just perform r/w operations on the data bus, maybe with a couple of timing probes in the test bench if you need that. Good luck, Johan P, Sweden Tomek wrote: > > Hello, > > I have a problem with simulation of model after implementation. It's a model of tri state data bus in verilog. The code is below: > > module DataBusBuffer(D,D_IN,READ_C0,READ_C1,READ_C2,WRITE_2_C0,WRITE_2_C1,WRITE_2_C2,WRITE_2_CWR,D_OUT); > > inout [7:0] D; > input [7:0] D_IN; > input READ_C0; > input READ_C1; > input READ_C2; > input WRITE_2_C0; > input WRITE_2_C1; > input WRITE_2_C2; > input WRITE_2_CWR; > //----------------------------------DECLARATION of OUTPUTS----------------------------------------- > output [7:0] D_OUT; > //------------------TRANSFER from INTERNAL BUS to DATA BUS---------------------------------------------- > assign D=(READ_C0 || READ_C1 || READ_C2) ? D_IN : 8'bz; > //------------------TRANSFER from DATA BUS to INTERNAL BUS---------------------------------------------- > assign D_OUT=(WRITE_2_C0 || WRITE_2_C1 || WRITE_2_C2 || WRITE_2_CWR) ? D : 8'bz; > > endmodule > > I do not know how write a testbench into model after implementation.I have a testbench, but it works only for behawioral simulation. > > Please about help > > P.S If you can help me, I will send you the files, because i do not know how attach the files into post: > > data_bus_im.v -model after implement > data_bus_im.sdf > data_bus_s.v - model after synthesis > data_bus.v -model behavioral > tb_data_bus.v - testbench > > Tomek -- APZ FOR MEN BECAUSE FIRST IMPRESSIONS LASTSArticle: 25893
Tomek, I think you are posting your questions to the wrong news group. Typical language questions like yours will get the best answers at comp.lang.verilog. /Johan P :) Mujtaba Hamid wrote: > > It seems that D is the bi-directional port and D_IN and D_OUT are busses interfacing with the port D. > If that is the case, the correct code would be > > inout [7:0] D; > input CNTRL; > > wire D_IN; > reg D_OUT; > > assign D = CNTRL ? D_OUT : 8'bZ; -- 3 stated output > > always @ (CNTRL or D) > if (CNTRL = '0') > D_IN <= D; > > Mujtaba > > Tomasz Brychcy wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I have written a model of tri state data bus: > > > > ports: > > > > inout [7:0] D; > > input [7:0] D_IN; > > input CNTRL; > > output [7:0] D_OUT; > > > > assign D=(CNTRL) ? D_IN ? 8'bz; //write > > assign D_OUT=(~CNTRL) ? D ? 8'bz; //read > > > > When I simulate the model (timing simulation) results are not correct. Behavioral simulation (before and after synthesis ) is correct. What I should do? Maybe testbench is wrong? > > > > I request for reply > > > > Tomek -- APZ FOR MEN BECAUSE FIRST IMPRESSIONS LASTSArticle: 25894
Hi Robert, I have done several "successful" transports between different FPGA architectures/ providers without changing the source code, reaching "reasonebly high performance" (170 MHz in a xcv highest speedgrade many levels of logic). I changed nothing in the source (the change was from some Altera device) but I did a couple of things with the synthesis script. Wait... the answer is NO, because I have not written the source myself for any of those transports - i have only done back end of the design :) /Johan P Robert Posey wrote: > > Dear Gentle Persons, > > Has anyone successfully written VHDL code for large FPGA's that is transportable > without modification between Xlinx, Altera Etc. I looking for someone who > has actually successfully complete the process. To get reasonable high > performance, its seems almost everyone uses arch. specific components, which > likely won't match up at least between companies. Has anyone tried this > lately. By Moderately high performance I mean a FPGA more than 70% utilized, > and operating at speed levels that require one of the faster speed grades for > a given arch. > > MuddyArticle: 25895
Hello, I need to interface a Spartan 40XL with a 5V CMOS (not TTL compatible, sigh...) I've seen on the Xilinx web an application note (vtt002.pdf) where they use a pull-up resistor to 5V and use the input to put the output in 3 state when it has reached a 3.3V 1 level. (not very clear description. i't better explained in the AN) How can I use this in VHDL? I use this output as a 3-state bus. Should I instanciate an OBUFT gate or is there a more clever way to do this? Thanks Marc BattyaniArticle: 25896
I also do not completely understand what you are doing, but this sounds
a little like a bit packing function I had to design once. Your case is
a bit simplified by the fact that they two data sizes have a common
divisor of 4.
You can construct a barrel shifter to rotate the 20 bit word into a
second 20 bit word. The second 20 bit word is applied to each 20 bit
chunk of a 64 bit register. The remaining four bits of the 64 bit
register pickup the 4 LSBs of the second 20 bit word.
I know this sounds confusing, but it gets worse. I'll try a diagram.
Rotate Pack Delay Hold
4 _________ ______ _______
||=/=>| | | | | |
|| 20 | | 16 | | 16 | |
||=/=>| |==/==>| Reg |==/==>| 64 |
_________ || 20 | | | | | Bit |
| | ||=/=>| 64 | | | | Reg |
20 | Barrel | 20 || 20 | Bit | |______| | | 64
==/==>| Shifter |=/=====/=>|D Reg | |
|==/==>
| | 16 | | 48 | |
|_________| ===/=>|CE |=========/=========>| |
_________ || |_________| |_______|
| | ||
| Enable |====
|_________|
A counter and decoder keeps track of where the data is being stored into
the packing register. The decoder enables 5, 4-bit sections of the 64
bit register on every 20 bit word that is written. When the last word is
written to the 64 bit register the holding register is clocked. On the
last word some bits may be written around the top/bottom so you need to
add a delay register to save the bits that will be overwritten.
This will give you a 64 bit word on every 3 or 4 writes from the 20 bit
bus. This should be much less hardware than a 640 bit register and
should also reduce your latency a great deal.
Anoop Nannra wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I'm trying to figure out a buffering strategy for doing a 20 bit to 64 bit
> bus conversion and vice versa.
>
> I've come up with something simple like storing 32 20bit transactions and
> then doing a copy to a 640 bit register and then performing 10 64bit
> transactions. Unfortunately I don't like this solution as it's not that
> elegant. Does anyone out there kow of a better way to do this ?
>
> TIA
>
> Anoop
--
Rick Collins
rick.collins@XYarius.com
Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.
Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design
Arius
4 King Ave
Frederick, MD 21701-3110
301-682-7772 Voice
301-682-7666 FAX
Internet URL http://www.arius.com
Article: 25897Ray Andraka wrote: > > The short answer is yes. You can often get reasonably high performance using > only the constructs that a decent synthesis tool generates. All that infers is > that you have written your code in such a way that it doesn't pile many levels > of combinatorial stuff between registers. For example, A simple shift register > will pretty much run at the max speeds of the fpga regardless of the > architecture. > > Filling up a big device is not hard either, **especially** if you don't use the > device features in your code. > > So, neither of these benchmarks are truely a measure of optimality for an FPGA > design. I'm not sure what you would use as an objective metric. Perhaps the > ratio of equivalent gates (in your design) to marketing gates. I wasn't implying it was, I was trying to insure that the design transferred between companies was one that stressed the abilities for the two different but roughly equal FPGA arch. In most of the Military systems, we try and keep the first release of a FPGA below 75%(or even better 50%) of total capacity to allow significant changes without relaying out the board. In our business the potential cost of relaying out the board is only spread over 20-2000 copies of a board. Plus there is the fact that we might have to make changes 10 years from now, and if we have to replace the board it will be a complete redesign due to parts that aren't made anymore. > FOr the speed grade comment, Having to use one of the faster speed grade parts > is not what I'd consider a badge of honor, A true mark of excellence is getting > a fast design to meet timing in a slow speed grade part. I included the speed grade comment to attempt to insure that people wouldn't give examples of 20 Mhz designs in a 200 Mhz part. If the synthesis tool works at all, straight VHDL should work fine unless there are hidden performance requirements. Of course the best designs will minimize the speed requirements for a given task, but that wasn't the point. > When it comes down to the bottom line, I guess the measurement could be is the > customer happy with the price and performance. That's what it's all about isn't > it? > In the End, though we usually work to contractual requirements that we have to meet or explain why. MuddyArticle: 25898
Bill Blyth wrote: > I would second the point on raw pinout data. This would beat copying the > stuff from the pdf, reformatting it and subsequent symbol generation and > checking. > This would indeed be great but after asking this of just about every device manufacturer on the planet over the last 10 years I've come to the conclusion that its an exercise in futility. For the FPGA/CPLD manufacturers there's really no excuse since this info has to be available for the place/route tools.Article: 25899
It is likely that your resource count was high because you were using FF based registers instead of the LUT based RAM. A LUT will give you 16 bits of storage instead of one bit in a FF. To get deeper memory, you can either use LUTs as muxes or use the T-bufs as tristate buffers onto the long lines. Either way works. If you are desiging 50 registers, 4 banks of LUTs can be combined to give you a 64 bit memory. If they are 8 bits wide, you are looking at either 16 CLBs for a Tbuf based design or 28 CLBs for a mux based design. To get either of these, you will need to instantiate the memory or at least look at some sample code from Xilinx. There are RAM primatives for VHDL and I believe there are ROM primatives that let you define the contents as part of the VHDL design if that is better. But I guess your micro loads the values for the tones when it decides which tones to output. This is all assuming you are working in a 4K series of Xilinx devices. The Virtex parts have block memory that can do this in one block. Neo Wei Thiam wrote: > > I am currently using 2 chips to produce a PCM coded DTMF stream and was trying to replace it with a Xilinx fpga that was already in the design for other reasons. > > My solution was to store the pre-calculated PCM code on ROM and tasked the CPU to load up a series of 8-bit PCM registers on FPGA before initiating the transmission. The FPGA will continously loop through the registers to transmit the PCM code. > > However I realised it took about 50% of the FPGA resources to implement a sequence of 50 registers of the 40k gate FPGA. This is much lower than the available 3k RAM available. > > Is this the norm? If so, how can we get 3k RAM out of the FPGA? > I implemented the design in VHDL and inferred the RAM using array. > > Regards, > > Neo Wei Thiam -- Rick Collins rick.collins@XYarius.com Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY removed. Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company Specializing in DSP and FPGA design Arius 4 King Ave Frederick, MD 21701-3110 301-682-7772 Voice 301-682-7666 FAX Internet URL http://www.arius.com
Site Home Archive Home FAQ Home How to search the Archive How to Navigate the Archive
Compare FPGA features and resources
Threads starting:
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