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
2017JanFebMarApr2017

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 11750

Article: 11750
Subject: ahdl to vhdl or verilog
From: "Smartchip" <smchip@ms19.hinet.net>
Date: 7 Sep 1998 12:13:19 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I need a tool.
I hope that can transfer Altera(ahdl) to Vhdl or verilog.
Article: 11751
Subject: Re: 22V10 programming
From: peter299@maroon.tc.umn.edu (Wade D. Peterson)
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 12:26:34 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Raymond Chiu <chiu@gate.net> wrote:

>The group assessment is correct: I am interested in having a PLD burned, which
>means I need to make a decision a burner.  I am having difficulty finding a
>burner within my budget ($2000 is a little too rich).

>Any suggestions are welcome and appreciated.

>Thank you,
>Raymond

I've got several programmers, but the one I always seem to grab is the
Needhams Electronics EMP-20.  I think it's about $450 US.  Their web
page is at <www.needhams.com>.  Works over a PC parallel port,
supports almost every DIP device you can think of, and free
programming algorithms over the net.

Wade Peterson
Silicore Corporation  www.silicore.net


Article: 11752
Subject: Re: Altera 10K20 Register File Implementation??
From: Achim Gratz <gratz@ite.inf.tu-dresden.de>
Date: 7 Sep 1998 15:13:09 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
b_rich2@my-dejanews.com writes:

> I actually looked at the LPM_RAM_DQ but I need 2 read data ports and the
> LPM_RAM only provided one. Also it's a bugger that it doesn't address the
> read and write ports seperately. You can't read a seperate port at the same
> time you are writing data. It would be perfect if it had 1 16 bit data input
> bus, 4 bit write address bus, 2 X 16 bit data read busses. That's what my
> design has at the moment but I would like a way that doesn't use as much real
> estate on the chip. My design is 5 stage pipelined, so I really need single
> clock cycle register file too.	Still thinking of alternatives. Thanks for
> any help and also for the replies I've received so far, very much
> appreciated.

Is there a requirement that the pipeline clock and the register file
clock be the same?  I'd think that the RAM in the 10K is at about
200MHz (maybe a bit slower, I don't have the data sheet handy) which
your processor is probably not going to make even with 5 pipeline
stages.  So having a 4:1 sub-clock on the register file gives you four
ports (perhaps only three because of write turnaround), while your
processor can still go at 50MHz, which isn't too bad.  Another idea to
skim off clock cycles is to replicate the register file and write to
all the EAB in parallel (single write port only) and then the next
clock you have as many independent read ports as you can spare EAB for
(two in your case, which sounds like it should be possible).


Achim Gratz.

--+<[ It's the small pleasures that make life so miserable. ]>+--
WWW:    http://www.inf.tu-dresden.de/~ag7/{english/}
E-Mail: gratz@ite.inf.tu-dresden.de
Phone:  +49 351 463 - 8325
Article: 11753
Subject: Re: Altera 10K20 Register File Implementation??
From: Rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 12:14:37 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
b_rich2@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> I actually looked at the LPM_RAM_DQ but I need 2 read data ports and the
> LPM_RAM only provided one. Also it's a bugger that it doesn't address the
> read and write ports seperately. You can't read a seperate port at the same
> time you are writing data. It would be perfect if it had 1 16 bit data input
> bus, 4 bit write address bus, 2 X 16 bit data read busses. That's what my
> design has at the moment but I would like a way that doesn't use as much real
> estate on the chip. My design is 5 stage pipelined, so I really need single
> clock cycle register file too.  Still thinking of alternatives. Thanks for
> any help and also for the replies I've received so far, very much
> appreciated. Cheers, Bruce

You might want to consider using a Xilinx part. All of the XC4000
devices have dual port memory with two addresses, one write data bus and
two read data busses. I think this is exactly what you are asking for.
Your 16 bit wide reg file would be 8 CLBs. One address is used for
simultaneous Read and Write and the other register is used for a
simultaneous and separate Read. 

Of course this would require that you learn a whole new development
system and a new architecture. But life is full of challenges, right?


-- 

Rick Collins

redsp@XYusa.net

remove the XY to email me.
Article: 11754
Subject: Re: 22V10 programming
From: msimon@tefbbs.com
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 16:21:56 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
JDR Micro Devices - has a few burners. Reasonable prices good service.

Simon
============================================
Raymond Chiu <chiu@gate.net> wrote:

>The group assessment is correct: I am interested in having a PLD burned, which
>means I need to make a decision a burner.  I am having difficulty finding a
>burner within my budget ($2000 is a little too rich).
>
>Any suggestions are welcome and appreciated.
>
>Thank you,
>Raymond
>
>Peter wrote:
>
>> >It also seems that Raymond may be interested in actually getting his PLDs
>> >physically programmed.  I don't have a specific suggestion there, although I
>> >have seen plenty of used legacy "universal programmers" for well under $100.
>> >While no longer "universal," anything less than 10 years old will probably
>> >have no problem programming a 22V10.
>>
>> Need to be careful here, since almost every vendor's 22V10 has a
>> different programming algorithm.
>>
>> You need to make sure the programmer supports the *specific*
>> vendor/device you want to use. And get it in writing, in case the
>> algorithm is duff.
>>
>> --
>> Peter.
>>
>> Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
>> E-mail replies to zX80@digiYserve.com but
>> remove the X and the Y.
>
>
>

Opinions expressed herein are solely my own and may or may not reflect my opinion at this particular time or any other.
Article: 11755
Subject: Re: 22V10 programming
From: Phil Hays <spampostmaster@sprynet.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 09:37:21 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Raymond Chiu <chiu@gate.net> wrote:

> The group assessment is correct: I am interested in having a PLD 
> burned, which means I need to make a decision a burner.  I am 
> having difficulty finding a burner within my budget ($2000 is a 
> little too rich).

I would like to suggest some of the in-circuit programable PLD's.  While
these would be somewhat more costly per part, and would be both a
different pinout and (probably) surface mount.  If you are designing a
new board these issues would probably not be a problem, however if you
are modifying an existing design you need the same pinout and package.

If you are interesting, here are a few web pages:

http://vantis.com

http://altera.com

http://xilinx.com

-- 
Phil Hays
"Irritatingly,  science claims to set limits on what 
we can do,  even in principle."   Carl Sagan
Article: 11756
Subject: Re: Altera 10K20 Register File Implementation??
From: muzok@pacbell.net (muzo)
Date: 07 Sep 1998 10:09:47 PDT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
One idea might be to use two copies of RAM for two ports and when you write,
write the same data to both locations. I think this should be doable if you use
the sync version of the embedded ram. Do a memory generate on sync input, async
output. Then you can read one port on one address and write to both ports on a
different address.

b_rich2@my-dejanews.com wrote:

>In article <35f3780f.0@news3.uswest.net>,
>  <Ernest Chiu> wrote:
>> the 10K family has embedded memory use LPM_RAM
>
>I actually looked at the LPM_RAM_DQ but I need 2 read data ports and the
>LPM_RAM only provided one. Also it's a bugger that it doesn't address the
>read and write ports seperately. You can't read a seperate port at the same
>time you are writing data. It would be perfect if it had 1 16 bit data input
>bus, 4 bit write address bus, 2 X 16 bit data read busses. That's what my
>design has at the moment but I would like a way that doesn't use as much real
>estate on the chip. My design is 5 stage pipelined, so I really need single
>clock cycle register file too.	Still thinking of alternatives. Thanks for
>any help and also for the replies I've received so far, very much
>appreciated. Cheers, Bruce
>
>>
>> b_rich2@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
>> <6svbud$7cf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>> >Hi,  I am a student and am currently designing a register file in Altera
>> 7.21
>> >to be used in a project I am undertaking (non-commercial).  I have a
>> question
>> >about whether there is a better way of implementing than what I am
>> currently
>> >doing. I have 16 X 16bit registers which I have constructed out of 16 X
>> >LPM_FF (D type, 16 bits wide). So this takes up 256 LC's which is okay. But
>> >here's the problem. I need 2 Output data buses from the register file. I am
>> >currently using 2 X LPM_MUX (16 lines X 16 bit) to select which registers
>> to
>> >put on the bus. I have tested and simulated this design and it works okay.
>> >The problem is that the 2 MUX's take up 416 LC's!! My whole register file
>> >takes up 688 LC's, which is 59% of the space on my device!! This doesn't
>> >leave me with much room for the rest of my project. I haven't completed my
>> >project yet, but it appears I will be really struggling for space, and I am
>> >required to use the 10K20.  Surely there would have to be a better way of
>> >designing a register file than what I have done, but I just can't seem to
>> >think of a better way. I've been working on this problem now for several
>> >weeks and am not making any progress. If there is anyone out there who
>> would
>> >be able to give me some advice I would be eternally grateful. Thanks in
>> >advance. Bruce.
>> >
>> >-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>> >http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum
>>
>>
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum

muzo

WDM & NT Kernel Driver Development Consulting <muzok@pacbell.net>
Article: 11757
Subject: Re: 22V10 programming
From: ChrisEilbeck <chris@yordas.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 20:03:01 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I've used the Cypress PALCE22V10 devices with the Cypress Warp2 software
and a Dataman48 programmer and had some quite good results.  The
simulator with Warp2 is a little basic but it works well enough for
small designs.

Chris
-- 
Chris Eilbeck
mailto:chris@yordas.demon.co.uk
Article: 11758
Subject: PCI cores again!!!!!
From: "Eric W Braeden" <braeden@erinet.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 20:24:57 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

I'm looking for a basic VHDL PCI core. One can web surf
for days on end and never get enough info. Who has the
most reasonable prices for a PCI core? I would like to
avoid calling every vendor to get prices, etc.

I would really appreciate suggestions.

TIA

Eric



Article: 11759
Subject: DataIO + EPC1 problem
From: Nicolas Matringe <nicolas@dot.com.fr>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 09:17:17 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello
The problem has already been mentionned 1 or 2 months ago.
I can't manage to program an Altera PROM EPC1 with the DataIO ChipWriter
Someone at DAtaIO told me this problem appeared with designs compiled
with Max+ v8.2 and that I should use an *older* version (I'm a bit
puzzled here. I hope he meant newer) However, I use Max+ v8.3

Any idea?

Nicolas MATRINGE                   DotCom SA
Conception électronique            16 rue du Moulin des Bruyères
Tel: 00 33 1 46 67 51 00           92400 COURBEVOIE
Fax: 00 33 1 46 67 51 01
Mail reply : remove one dot from the address (guess which :-)
Article: 11760
Subject: FPGA Cost ?
From: Yang Yungchiang <r41243@email.sps.mot.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 08:00:36 +0000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi,

I am new to real FPGA world.  I am looking a cheap FPGA kits that enable
me to program my own chip.  I understand that each FPGA/CPLD is not that
expensive.  However, I have no idea about the programmer (burner ?)
pricing.  Could someone please give me an idea on how much a FPGA
Programmer cost.

Thank you.

--
Yung-Chiang YANG



Article: 11761
Subject: Re: 22V10 programming
From: "Andrew Papageorgiou, SWI, C" <apapage1@ecid.cig.mot.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 09:06:44 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi,

Lattice do some ISP 22V10 parts in PLCC which use the 4 normally unused
pins
one in the center of each edge.
This coupled with a 28 pin PLCC clip on connecter used for debugging
should 
allow an ISP system with standard PLCC parts and no PCB changes

just my 2 pence worth.

	Andy

All opinion are my own ....
Article: 11762
Subject: Code coverage tools
From: Hans-Erik Floryd <Hans-Erik.Floryd@nospam.emw.ericsson.se>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 10:16:06 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi,

We're considering purchasing a code coverage tool. Does anybody have any
experiences in this field? Any particular tool you would recommend?
We're mainly interested in tools for VHDL.

Thanks,
 Hans-Erik Floryd

--
  Hans-Erik Floryd                       Telephone: +46 31 747 00 00
  Ericsson Microwave Systems AB          Direct:    +46 31 747 65 86
  Airborne Radar Division                Telefax:   +46 31  27 10 19
  Hans-Erik.Floryd@emw.ericsson.se
Article: 11763
Subject: Re: 22V10 programming
From: mikeandmax@aol.com (Mikeandmax)
Date: 8 Sep 1998 12:17:17 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Phil mentioned
>If you are interesting, here are a few web pages:
>
>http://vantis.com
>
>http://altera.com
>
>http://xilinx.com
>
>-

I would also recommend Lattice at

www.latticesemi.com

- ISPGAL22V10

or 1k, 21k, 3k CPLD families

In addition to being the inventor of ISP PLDS, they have free s/w on the web
which supports GALs and CPLDs,  - all you would need for programming is a
download cable, from a local Lattice distributor - or build your own, schematic
is in the data book.

Mike Thomas
LSC FAE - NY
Article: 11764
Subject: Re: Digital PLL
From: Jonathan Bromley <jsebromley@brookes.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 13:22:21 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
ems@nospam.riverside-machines.com wrote:

(in reply to my post about DPLLs for recovering data clocks
from synchronous serial data streams)
> The point of a PLL is that it should be able to lock over a frequency
> range - it shouldn't matter if the transmit clock is at a different
> frequency, as long as it's within the lock range of the downstream
> station. Are you saying that, in a chain of three SCCs, the third one
> couldn't retrieve a data stream generated by the first one (which
> would of course make the SCC useless?)
No (although of course if there is degradation at each step, there
must be some limit to the number of steps before the signal is
irrecoverable - to allow an indefinite chain, you have to do
something to IMPROVE the signal from time to time).  Sorry, my
point was slightly different:  the particular protocol I was
using, SDLC Loop mode, requires *exact* one-to-one matching of
transmitted to received bits at each node, over arbitrarily
long time periods.  So there must be no long-term frequency 
difference between the two clocks.  Short-term you can soak up 
with suitable FIFOs of course.  BTW, I note that the latest
version of Zilog's databook on the SCC (Z85230 ESCC) explicitly
acknowledges this problem and indicates how to solve it - tho'
I haven't yet checked whether their solution is correct, and
I couldn't tie it up with the other parts of the databook!

> You used fibre optic at *One Megabit* and got distortion of *500 ns*
> ??? There seems to be some confusion here - can you tell us (a) which
> HP device and connector, (b) what cable, (c) what cable length?
OK, so you discovered that I'm a cheapskate.  Actually I was using
HP's so-called SERCOS-compliant devices (HFBR1604 etc, IIRC)
which are supposed to be OK for 2MBd.  With a few metres of polymer
fibre and SMA connectors - once again, SERCOS-like.  After this
experience I now know that HP's HEADLINE specs  tell you how many 
transitions per second you can shove down the link - not how 
precisely their timing is preserved - this latter info is a bit 
more deeply buried in the detailed data.  
I got vastly better results (both in terms
of dynamic range and pulse distortion) with home-grown AC-coupled
receiver circuitry but the HP devices are neat, cheap and compact,
and for some applications (not mine as it happens) the DC 
coupling of the receiver is useful.
And of course I could have used faster parts and solved the problem
that way.  But it remains an interesting problem which, in the end,
turned out to be tractable.  You don't always have to push the
technology envelope to stumble into a puzzle that's worth solving.
-- 
Jonathan Bromley
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Electronics is fun.  If you want me to take it seriously, 
call and we'll talk consultancy rates.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Article: 11765
Subject: Re: FPGA Cost ?
From: "Rich Fournier" <rfournier@analogic.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 08:32:11 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

   Your choice of FPGA/CPLD will determine what you need for programming
support. SRAM based FPGA's require an on-board memory, typically an EPROM,
or can be programmed via a microcontroller or CPU. Many CPLD's now support
in-system-programming (ISP), which may require a hardware adapter that you
prurchase from the CPLD vendor and attach to a parallel port on a PC. Your
best bet is to find an FPGA/CPLD that will work in your application, then
consult the vendor's local reps. for programming information.

-RF

Yang Yungchiang wrote in message <35F4E421.CAEF3B45@email.sps.mot.com>...
>Hi,
>
>I am new to real FPGA world.  I am looking a cheap FPGA kits that enable
>me to program my own chip.  I understand that each FPGA/CPLD is not that
>expensive.  However, I have no idea about the programmer (burner ?)
>pricing.  Could someone please give me an idea on how much a FPGA
>Programmer cost.
>
>Thank you.
>
>--
>Yung-Chiang YANG
>
>
>
>



Article: 11766
Subject: Re: Assigning IOE on Altera's FLEX10k
From: "Morten L. Haugen" <mlh@vingmed.no>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 15:26:00 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
If you are using MAXPLUS2 you probably need to use a generate statement.
That was the case when I used MAXPLUS2 a year ago.


library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
library altera;
use altera.maxplus2.all;

entity tri_state_bd is
  port
    (
     input:     in   std_logic_vector(21 downto 0);
     enable:    in   std_logic_vector(21 downto 0);
     output:    out  std_logic_vector(21 downto 0)
     );
end tri_state_bd;
architecture arch_tri_state of tri_state_bd is
begin

#ifdef MAXPLUS2
  gen_tri:
    for i in input'range generate
      tri_buf: tri port map(input(i), enable(i), output(i));
    end generate gen_tri;
#endif

#ifdef SYNPLIFY
  process(input,enable)
  begin
    for i in input'range loop
      if (enable(i) = '1') then
        output(i) <= input(i);
      else
        output(i)  <= 'Z';
      end if;
    end loop;
  end process;
#endif

end arch_tri_state;

--------


Article: 11767
Subject: Re: Design Re-use, IP cores, Megafunctions, etc...
From: Craig Yarbrough <hyarbr01@harris.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 09:32:53 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
wluka@hotmail.com wrote:
> 
> As FPGAs grow, the need to re-use designs and source designs from third
> parties is going to become more and more important.....

I've been asked on occasion if it would be possible to take pieces of
different people's designs and include them in a new design. Their
biggest concern was having to regression-test each piece for timing.
Because of the limitations of our tools, my answer has always been to
start over at the VHDL level and instantiate each piece in the code, and
then derive a whole new set of timing constraints for the new design. To
me this seems like a waste of good place and route effort! There's no
reason why we shouldn't be able to surgically remove entire pieces of
netlist (LCA), keeping the timing requirements intact, drop them into a
new design, AND give the placer the latitude to place the piece where it
sees fit. Having one file such as an .xnf for both netlist
(partitioning) and timing would greatly simplify integration. The tool
must also enable us to save and maintain the new netlist cores and
readily retrieve them into VHDL or schematic. Dear Santa,....

			- Craig
Article: 11768
Subject: Re: Altera 10K20 Register File Implementation??
From: Ray Andraka <no_spam_randraka@ids.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 09:50:01 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
This is one of the bigger problems with using Altera  for signal processing
applications where delay queues and register files are often needed.  The problem
is twofold.  First, other than the limited EAB resource, you don't really have
any way to store bits other than in the LE registers.  The EAB resources are
quite limited, so implementing various delay queues in the design is difficult.
Second, there are no tristates on the LE's so you are forced to use a mux so
select between registers.  Altera does allow the register to be used separately
from the combinatorial part of the LE, so you may be able to put the MUX in the
same LE's as the registers if you control the clock.  Use the cascade chain to
build your mux and save some registers (at the expense of speed).

The other big issue I have with Altera for DSP apps is that by using the carry
chain, you reduce the LE to a pair of 3 LUTs (one for carry function, one for
'sum' function) and one of those inputs for each is used for the carry input.
That means any arithmetic function is limited to 2 inputs (ie plain vanilla adder
w/o clear, enable, bypass, or add/subtract controls) unless you go to two levels
of logic.

That said, the global routing on Altera makes in far less sensitive to placement
than many other FPGAs (like Xilinx), which makes it more synthesis friendly.
This too is a double edged blade, as it also means the performance for an
optimized design is not what it could be if the routing were more local.

b_rich2@my-dejanews.com wrote:

> Hi,  I am a student and am currently designing a register file in Altera 7.21
> to be used in a project I am undertaking (non-commercial).  I have a question
> about whether there is a better way of implementing than what I am currently
> doing. I have 16 X 16bit registers which I have constructed out of 16 X
> LPM_FF (D type, 16 bits wide). So this takes up 256 LC's which is okay. But
> here's the problem. I need 2 Output data buses from the register file.  I am
> currently using 2 X LPM_MUX (16 lines X 16 bit) to select which registers to
> put on the bus. I have tested and simulated this design and it works okay.
> The problem is that the 2 MUX's take up 416 LC's!! My whole register file
> takes up 688 LC's, which is 59% of the space on my device!! This doesn't
> leave me with much room for the rest of my project. I haven't completed my
> project yet, but it appears I will be really struggling for space, and I am
> required to use the 10K20.  Surely there would have to be a better way of
> designing a register file than what I have done, but I just can't seem to
> think of a better way. I've been working on this problem now for several
> weeks and am not making any progress. If there is anyone out there who would
> be able to give me some advice I would be eternally grateful. Thanks in
> advance. Bruce.
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum



--
-Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
email randraka@ids.net
http://users.ids.net/~randraka


Article: 11769
Subject: Re: Xilinx CLPD
From: Craig Yarbrough <hyarbr01@harris.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 10:12:00 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
remy@provide.net wrote:
> 
> I am new to the programmable logic game and have recently purchased
> the $95 Xilinx software. I am using one of the 9500 series CLPD's with
> schematic entry. All I need for eternal peace is a 4-digit divide by N
> counter to be programmed with 4 BCD thumbwheel switches to divide from
> 1 to 9,999. I would be GREATLY grateful for any help! Thank you very
> Much....
> 
> Jim Remy
> 
> remy@provide.net

Jim,

From my experience, you're best off going with a 14-bit down counter
with a terminal count that synchronously resets the counter and enables
the master clock to clock whatever it is that you're driving. You will
first need a BCD-to-binary converter. The binary number will be 14 bits
wide (ceiling[log base 2 of 10,000]=14). Next, you will need a 14-bit
down counter that runs off of the master clock. The counter's terminal
count (TC) will be active when the counter reaches all 0's. Connect TC
to the synchronous load pin of the 14-bit counter and attach the 14-bit
binary number to the counter's synchronous input. Now you can use the
counter's TC to enable the master clock. Say you want to run a D-flop at
a rate divided down from the master clock. Attach the TC of the counter
to the enable pin of the D-flop. Attach the master clock to the clock
pin of the D-flop. Now you're all set! A couple of final notes: 1. A
value of '0' for the synchronous input to the counter will cause the
counter to divide by one. A value of '1' will cause it to divide by two,
etc. So, you will need to subtract by one either before or after the
BCD-to-binary conversion (I suggest after). 2. Ensure that the master
clock is on a low-skew net (i.e. global buffer or longline). If the
amount of skew is greater than the setup time for the flops in the
counter, you will have problems.

			- Craig
Article: 11770
Subject: Re: Code coverage tools
From: Craig Yarbrough <hyarbr01@harris.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 10:17:50 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hans-Erik Floryd wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We're considering purchasing a code coverage tool. Does anybody have any
> experiences in this field? Any particular tool you would recommend?
> We're mainly interested in tools for VHDL.

Hans,

What do you mean by a "code coverage" tool? Synthesis?

		- Craig
Article: 11771
Subject: faculty openings at the University of Nebraska
From: sscott@cse.unl.edu (Stephen D. Scott)
Date: 8 Sep 1998 14:41:06 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>


There are also openings for January 1999.  See the web page for more
details.

Stephen Scott

--
Dept. of Computer Science & Engr.        Asst. Prof. Stephen D. Scott
University of Nebraska                                   Ferguson 305
Lincoln, NE  68588-0115                            sscott@cse.unl.edu
(402) 472-6994                        http://www.cse.unl.edu/~sscott/

=====================================================================

                    University of Nebraska -- Lincoln  
               Computer Science   Engineering Department
 
The UNL CSE Department invites applications for several tenure-track
faculty appointments at assistant, associate, or full professor rank
to begin August 1999.  Applicants should have promise for innovative
research and teaching in:

    VLSI design or design automation,
    Software engineering,
    Enterprise systems including electronic commerce,
    Distributed object technologies and middleware,
    Human-computer interaction,
    Database and information systems,
    Computer and communications security, and/or
    Theory and algorithms

and hold or be completing a PhD in computer science, computer
engineering, or related field.  Exceptional candidates in other areas
will be considered.

The CSE Department offers both computer science and computer
engineering programs leading to BS, MS, and PhD degrees and has 20
tenure faculty lines, over 500 undergraduates and 100 graduate
students.  UNL is Nebraska's comprehensive research university with
Carnegie I standing and membership in the American Association of
Universities.  In 1998, UNL received the largest gift in its history
to establish the JD Edwards Honors Program in Computer Science and
Management.

Review of applications begins January 18, 1999, and will continue until
all positions are filled.  A resume, statement of research and teaching
interests, and three references letters should be sent to:

    Al Surkan, CSE Search Committee Chair Computer Science and
    Engineering Department University of Nebraska -- Lincoln Lincoln,
    Nebraska 68588-0115

See www.cse.unl.edu; email search@cse.unl.edu; phone 402.472.2401; fax
402.472.7767.  UNL is committed to a pluralistic campus community
through AA/EO, is responsive to dual career couples, and makes
reasonable ADA accommodations.
--
Dept. of Computer Science & Engr.        Asst. Prof. Stephen D. Scott
University of Nebraska                                   Ferguson 305
Lincoln, NE  68588-0115                            sscott@cse.unl.edu
(402) 472-6994                        http://www.cse.unl.edu/~sscott/
Article: 11772
Subject: Re: Altera 10K20 Register File Implementation??
From: fatlad@my-dejanews.com
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 16:43:28 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In article <6svbud$7cf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
  b_rich2@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Hi,  I am a student and am currently designing a register file in Altera 7.21
> to be used in a project I am undertaking (non-commercial).  I have a question
> about whether there is a better way of implementing than what I am currently
> doing. I have 16 X 16bit registers which I have constructed out of 16 X
> LPM_FF (D type, 16 bits wide). So this takes up 256 LC's which is okay. But
> here's the problem. I need 2 Output data buses from the register file.
I am
> currently using 2 X LPM_MUX (16 lines X 16 bit) to select which registers to
> put on the bus. I have tested and simulated this design and it works okay.
> The problem is that the 2 MUX's take up 416 LC's!! My whole register file
> takes up 688 LC's, which is 59% of the space on my device!! This doesn't
> leave me with much room for the rest of my project. I haven't completed my
> project yet, but it appears I will be really struggling for space, and I am
> required to use the 10K20.  Surely there would have to be a better way of
> designing a register file than what I have done, but I just can't seem to
> think of a better way. I've been working on this problem now for several
> weeks and am not making any progress. If there is anyone out there who would
> be able to give me some advice I would be eternally grateful. Thanks in
> advance. Bruce.
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum
>

You may have a look at the new Vantis VF1 family. The devices have memory
blocks that are 32x4 and are dual port. There are four members of the family
ranging from 12K upto 36K. Dual port memory simplifies matters!

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Article: 11773
Subject: Re: Altera 10K20 Register File Implementation??
From: fliptron@netcom.com (Philip Freidin)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 16:45:41 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi Bruce. Your need for a register file is a common one, and as you have
found out, it can take a lot of resources. While you offer eternal
gratitude for anyone who offers advice, I suspect that your constraints of
not being able to change the device type will preclude me from this
treasure. It is also a shame that you have spent several weeks on this.

The underlying primitives that an FPGA offers you can constrain your 
design. In your case, the need for two read ports restricts you to a 
flipflop as your primitive, bacause the FPGA you are using does not offer 
anything any bigger that is dual ported. The dual ported nature of a 
flipflop is that you can write to it any time you want (with a clock), 
and you can read it any time you want ( with muxes, for arrays). The EABs 
are not dual ported, so they dont help much, unless you can clock them at 
twice your cycle rate. If you want to write to the register file as well, 
then even faster clocking will be needed.

If a memory supports at least two ports, one read and one write, then 
register files of 1xW, NxR are possible by writing to all memories at the 
same time and to the same address, but reading from independent 
addresses. The EABs can't do this in a single cycle in the devices you are 
using.

Given my Xilinx centric view of the world, let me show you what I believe 
is the right tool for the job: The XC4000E, or EX, or XL.

These devices have a dual ported primitive that supports 1 port that can 
read or write in one cycle, and one port that is read only. The primitive 
is a memory of 16 bits, so the mux you need for read (and the decode 
logic need for write) are part of the primitive. Size wise, it is as big 
as one of your LC's. (in Xilinx terminology, half a CLB)

To build a register file with 16 words by 16 bits, takes 16 of these, 16 
LC's, and the reads and writes can occur independently, and without 
contention, at full clock speed. This is done by using the R/W port in a 
write-only mode.

If your cycle time is long enough, you can put a mux in the address path 
of the write only side, and mux in a read address to make dual use of 
this port. Use the rising edge of the clock to write, use clock high to 
select the read addres, clock low for write address, and falling edge of 
clock to take a snapshot of the read data into some flipflops, while the 
address is the write address. 16 LC's for the memory, 4 LC's for the 
address mux, 16 FF's (4 can share the address mux LC's, 12 need an LC of 
their own).

A cleaner and faster solution is to just duplicate the memory. Two blocks 
of 16 LC's. On the write side, write to the same address in both blocks. 
On the read side, each block can have an independent address. This 
actually implements a 1xW, 2xR register file. Again, if you can afford 
the cycle time to play around with the write address mux, and dual use 
the port, the same basic structure gives you 1xW, 4xR.

All these solutions are also going to be much faster than an array of 
flipflops and output select muxes.

As I said above, right tool for the job.

Sorry,
	Philip.


In article <6svbud$7cf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> b_rich2@my-dejanews.com writes:
>Hi,  I am a student and am currently designing a register file in Altera 7.21
>to be used in a project I am undertaking (non-commercial).  I have a question
>about whether there is a better way of implementing than what I am currently
>doing. I have 16 X 16bit registers which I have constructed out of 16 X
>LPM_FF (D type, 16 bits wide). So this takes up 256 LC's which is okay. But
>here's the problem. I need 2 Output data buses from the register file.	I am
>currently using 2 X LPM_MUX (16 lines X 16 bit) to select which registers to
>put on the bus. I have tested and simulated this design and it works okay.
>The problem is that the 2 MUX's take up 416 LC's!! My whole register file
>takes up 688 LC's, which is 59% of the space on my device!! This doesn't
>leave me with much room for the rest of my project. I haven't completed my
>project yet, but it appears I will be really struggling for space, and I am
>required to use the 10K20.  Surely there would have to be a better way of
>designing a register file than what I have done, but I just can't seem to
>think of a better way. I've been working on this problem now for several
>weeks and am not making any progress. If there is anyone out there who would
>be able to give me some advice I would be eternally grateful. Thanks in
>advance. Bruce.
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum


Article: 11774
Subject: Re: Code coverage tools
From: s_clubb@NOSPAMnetcomuk.co.uk (Stuart Clubb)
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 16:50:30 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Tue, 08 Sep 1998 10:17:50 -0400, Craig Yarbrough
<hyarbr01@harris.com> wrote:

>What do you mean by a "code coverage" tool? Synthesis?

Nope. A product that can tell you exactly how much of your code has
been exercised or "covered" by your testbench. Checking every branch,
if-then, case etc. and providing a count of every time the line is
executed during your simulation run. Very useful in complex designs or
in high reliability, military and medical applications. Also
applicable to high quality consultants where a measure of "quality
testing" becomes easier to provide to the end customer. Also stops you
"testing what is already tested".

For VHDL, might I suggest VHDLCover from TransEDA?

www.transeda.com

for Scandinavia, the local representative is Hardi Electronics

Stuart
Who works for a distributor of TransEDA product :-)
For Email remove "NOSPAM" from the address


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
2017JanFebMarApr2017

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