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 151700

Article: 151700
Subject: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: Alexander Kane <ajpkane@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 17:11:40 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Just a bit about the project I'm working on: Have an FPGA gathering
and manipulating data, and we need a processor to run the show and to
send the data over a network.  At the moment we are planning on using
a soft-processor.  Still early stages in the project and and I'm
currently deciding between Cyclone and Spartan.  I haven't had any
experience with either Nios II or MicroBlaze (and I believe that these
are the only real options out there if you want strong community and/
or professional support).

Anyway, what's really confusing me is the licensing issues.  I know
these questions have been asked before but I'm still confused.

I understand that to use the MicroBlaze processor you either need to
purchase the ISE Embedded Edition or purchase Platform Studio and the
Embedded Development Kit (and use it with ISE WebPACK).  However from
what I can find out it says that you're free to put MicroBlaze
processors on as many devices as you wish so long as they remain on
site.  I can't find any information about what type of license you
need to include MicroBlaze in a product being sold.

In the case of Nios II, you can use and develop with the Nios II with
the Quartus II Web Edition because it comes with the OpenCore license
that lets you use IP on an Altera FPGA so long as your development
board is plugged in to the PC (I assume it doesn't matter who's
hardware you use).  The e variant you can use for free, but the other
variants require a license to work when disconnected.  The license you
need is IP-NIOS, and though I can't find an official price listing
anywhere I've seen $US500 being mentioned on forums... and presumably
this allows you to sell as many products as you wish with Nios II
processors on them?

I've stated a whole bunch of assumptions here and I'd appreciate it if
someone could tell me if I'm on the right track.
Any advice on choosing between MicroBlaze and Nios II, or is there
another option I'm missing?
My company wants to spend as little as possible on licensing and/or
development tools (this is their first time using an FPGA in a
product), but my time is effectively free to them (I'm there under a
research grant).  That said, I know the free way is usually the hard
way so if I can make a compelling case for them to spend money it may
make my life a lot easier.

Article: 151701
Subject: Re: Win an Altera DE0-Nano (Cyclone IV Dev Kit)!
From: allen <ayhoung@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 22:20:37 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi RK and Torfinn,

I'm sorry you feel that way about FaceBook. For us, it's a convenient
way to reach out to customers directly by sharing content such as
videos, pictures, news to everyone who is a part of our Terasic
FaceBook page. It's simply a platform for expression of interest and
the latest FPGA platform news, so you are right about that.

As for people who abstain from using FaceBook (which I can understand
completely), we are also constantly looking for ways to interact
directly with FPGA designers, such as through forums, our webpage,
etc.

As always, if you have any suggestions, we would always certainly
appreciate them.

Thanks,
Allen


On May 5, 2:58=A0am, NeedCleverHandle <d_s_kl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 3, 2:37=A0am, allen <ayho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey guys!
>
> > Terasic Technologies is holding a contest to WIN the newly released
> > Altera DE0-Nano! Head over tohttp://www.terasic.com.tw/events/DE0_Nano_=
Contest/
> > to leave a comment and win one today!!!
>
> > Thanks,
> > Allen Houng
> > Terasic Technologieswww.terasic.com
>
> Mr. Allen Houng,
>
> FaceBook? =A0Really?
>
> If you were interested in the hobby market, FaceBook might be the
> right place. =A0Sadly, my vision of combined FaceBook and FPGAs looks a
> lot like someone living in his mother's basement building geeky toys.
>
> I like to be professional with my FPGA work.
>
> RK.


Article: 151702
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: "scrts" <mailsoc@[remove@here]gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 15:41:45 +0300
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

"Alexander Kane" <ajpkane@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:f1f230a8-d528-48f4-9db5-ac5700e6b2bb@17g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
> I've stated a whole bunch of assumptions here and I'd appreciate it if
> someone could tell me if I'm on the right track.
> Any advice on choosing between MicroBlaze and Nios II, or is there
> another option I'm missing?
> My company wants to spend as little as possible on licensing and/or
> development tools (this is their first time using an FPGA in a
> product), but my time is effectively free to them (I'm there under a
> research grant).  That said, I know the free way is usually the hard
> way so if I can make a compelling case for them to spend money it may
> make my life a lot easier.

1) You will have a lot of headaches using Xilinx EDK. MicroBlaze is not a 
softcpu to start with.
2) You can use LatticeMico32 softcpu (which is free) on Altera or Xilinx 
FPGAs. E.g. check the opensource project "Milkymist", they're running LM32 
softcpu on Spartan-6.
3) You can use Nios II/e (economy), which is also free, but I am not sure it 
could handle network speeds.

Anyway, I would definitely go for Altera, but if You're interested in Xilinx 
devices, then go to MIlkymist page. They've developed memory controller + 
ethernet mac + many other cores. 



Article: 151703
Subject: Why feedback clock in SDRAM controllers?
From: valtih1978 <inte..j@yandex.ru>
Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 22:02:32 +0300
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I see it in many SDRAM controllers, e.g. 
ftp://ftp.xilinx.com/pub/applications/xapp/xapp608.pdf, and nobody explains 
WHY

The extranal feedback trace must equal to CK len. Ok. This means that SDRAM 
will be clocked in phase with the FPGA system. How does it ensure that 
cmd/addr arrives to SDRAM in proper time, half cycle earlier of CK?

In the more recommended xapp266 and xapp253, the external feedback is not 
used. Why? What is the purpose of the second, internal DLL? What should be 
the len of feedback in this case?

In these designs, the read DQ is clocked directly by DQS. Yet, DQ is changed 
simultaneously with DQS. This ensures the setup/hold violation! The "HOW TO 
USE DDR SDRAM" says: "when controller receives read data from DDR SDRAM, it 
will internally delay the received strobe to the center of the received data 
window." I do not see any delay!

Thanks



Article: 151704
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: Ed McGettigan <ed.mcgettigan@xilinx.com>
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 20:01:47 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 6, 5:11=A0pm, Alexander Kane <ajpk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just a bit about the project I'm working on: Have an FPGA gathering
> and manipulating data, and we need a processor to run the show and to
> send the data over a network. =A0At the moment we are planning on using
> a soft-processor. =A0Still early stages in the project and and I'm
> currently deciding between Cyclone and Spartan. =A0I haven't had any
> experience with either Nios II or MicroBlaze (and I believe that these
> are the only real options out there if you want strong community and/
> or professional support).
>
> Anyway, what's really confusing me is the licensing issues. =A0I know
> these questions have been asked before but I'm still confused.
>
> I understand that to use the MicroBlaze processor you either need to
> purchase the ISE Embedded Edition or purchase Platform Studio and the
> Embedded Development Kit (and use it with ISE WebPACK). =A0However from
> what I can find out it says that you're free to put MicroBlaze
> processors on as many devices as you wish so long as they remain on
> site. =A0I can't find any information about what type of license you
> need to include MicroBlaze in a product being sold.
>
> In the case of Nios II, you can use and develop with the Nios II with
> the Quartus II Web Edition because it comes with the OpenCore license
> that lets you use IP on an Altera FPGA so long as your development
> board is plugged in to the PC (I assume it doesn't matter who's
> hardware you use). =A0The e variant you can use for free, but the other
> variants require a license to work when disconnected. =A0The license you
> need is IP-NIOS, and though I can't find an official price listing
> anywhere I've seen $US500 being mentioned on forums... and presumably
> this allows you to sell as many products as you wish with Nios II
> processors on them?
>
> I've stated a whole bunch of assumptions here and I'd appreciate it if
> someone could tell me if I'm on the right track.
> Any advice on choosing between MicroBlaze and Nios II, or is there
> another option I'm missing?
> My company wants to spend as little as possible on licensing and/or
> development tools (this is their first time using an FPGA in a
> product), but my time is effectively free to them (I'm there under a
> research grant). =A0That said, I know the free way is usually the hard
> way so if I can make a compelling case for them to spend money it may
> make my life a lot easier.

You have misunderstood what a "site license" means. This means that
the software or IP can be used within the limited physical distance of
the license server and not within a national or world basis for the
company that purchased the license.

The final bitstream can be shipped world wide.

Ed McGettigan
--
Xilinx Inc.

Article: 151705
Subject: Re: ise 10.1 (Linux) contraints problem
From: Michael <michael_laajanen@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 11:34:09 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi,

On 05/06/11 11:16 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
> On 05/06/2011 12:52 AM, Michael wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 05/05/11 05:42 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
>>> Michael wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> leave the GUI and use scripts, it never causes these problems!
>>> Well, I'll have to learn how to do this.
>>>
>>> I did use a command line to run promgen, as running it from the GUI
>>> crashes.
>>>
>>> Jon
>> To synth define PROJECT or replace with project name
>> xst -ifn ${PROJECT}.xst -ofn ${PROJECT}.log
>>
>> You could use xflow to run the flow for P&R
>> xflow -p partname ${PROJECT}
>>
>> There are probably even better ways that a are compatible with the GUI
>> ising tcl I assume but I have not digged in to that, I am to old...or
>> maybe not ;)
>>
>> And then bitgen like you have done with promgen
>>
>> You might need some config for bitgen
> OK, well I can probably dig the syntax out of the log files. I had no
> idea it was that simple!
>
> The Windows-fashioned text editor in ise is pretty awful, I usually use
> emacs.
>
> I DO like the simulator, though. MUCH easier to hop around in the
> hierarchy and bring up signals from various inner components of the
> design than Modelsim. And, it automatically saves the signals on the
> screen for next time.
>
> The promgen command line I got from a Xilinx article puts out the
> reverse bit ordering, so it wouldn't load. I'll have to figure out what
> option sets it for the other ordering. But, after I did the cleanup, the
> prom file formatter works from the gui. I need to find out what I'm
> doing wrong that fouls up the management of vhdl files.
> I put the files into a directory and edited them for the first cut there
> before setting up an ide project and adding the files to the project.
> This left several versions of files with the same name in the various
> levels of the directory, and I think that is what started this mess.
>
> I think working both outside ide and inside it is most of the cause of
> the problem.
>
> Jon
Hi Jon, read the excelent article pointed out but outputlogic and go 
scripting. Next move is go linux perhaps starting on a Virtualbox 
installation on top of your Windows.

Good to hear that you use Emacs, have you installed the VHDL and Verilog 
extensions to emacs?


Article: 151706
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: "scrts" <mailsoc@[remove@here]gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 13:28:28 +0300
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
You have misunderstood what a "site license" means. This means that
the software or IP can be used within the limited physical distance of
the license server and not within a national or world basis for the
company that purchased the license.

The final bitstream can be shipped world wide.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So companies, that has HQ/support/testing in USA, but most programmers in 
e.g. India, can't share the same licence server? Even through VPN? It is 
basically possible, but out of the licence?



Article: 151707
Subject: Re: ise 10.1 (Linux) constraints problem
From: Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com>
Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 19:55:45 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Michael wrote:


> Hi Jon, read the excelent article pointed out but outputlogic and go
> scripting. Next move is go linux perhaps starting on a Virtualbox
> installation on top of your Windows.
> 
> Good to hear that you use Emacs, have you installed the VHDL and Verilog
> extensions to emacs?
Well, that article is for 12.1, there might be a few changes to make it work
with 10.1, but I do appreciate that article.

I HAVE gone Linux, and am doing all new projects there, but I have some
older projects to maintain, some even using classic 5V Spartan, so I can't
completely abandon the ancient Windows stuff.  The problem I was having was
on the Linux 10.1 system, (as I even said in my subject line.)  Yes, it has
the VHDL language templates, but I'm not sure I really like them.  Maybe I
need to learn how to use them better.

I use Linux native, and run Windows as a guest OS under VMware.

Jon

Article: 151708
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: Alexander Kane <ajpkane@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 19:26:00 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
> You have misunderstood what a "site license" means. This means that
> the software or IP can be used within the limited physical distance of
> the license server and not within a national or world basis for the
> company that purchased the license.
>
> The final bitstream can be shipped world wide.

Thanks for clearing this up for me.

> 1) You will have a lot of headaches using Xilinx EDK. MicroBlaze is not a
> softcpu to start with.
> 2) You can use LatticeMico32 softcpu (which is free) on Altera or Xilinx
> FPGAs. E.g. check the opensource project "Milkymist", they're running LM32
> softcpu on Spartan-6.
> 3) You can use Nios II/e (economy), which is also free, but I am not sure it
> could handle network speeds.
>
> Anyway, I would definitely go for Altera, but if You're interested in Xilinx
> devices, then go to MIlkymist page. They've developed memory controller +
> ethernet mac + many other cores.

In regards to point (1) this is obviously your opinion, I was
wondering if anyone else would like to comment on this.
I am aware that LatticeMico32 is free, but I understand that an
optimised version is available for Lattice FPGAs (so it would make
sense to use it with a Lattice FPGA), whereas to use it on other FPGAs
you have to deal with a Verilog dump.  I'm just a little weary of
learning Verilog while working on this project.  Furthermore I have
heard that the community support for LatticeMico32 is poor.

Also is someone able to confirm about pricing for Nios II? (see first
post)

Article: 151709
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: Ed McGettigan <ed.mcgettigan@xilinx.com>
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 23:30:03 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 8, 3:28=A0am, "scrts" <mailsoc@[remove@here]gmail.com> wrote:
> You have misunderstood what a "site license" means. This means that
> the software or IP can be used within the limited physical distance of
> the license server and not within a national or world basis for the
> company that purchased the license.
>
> The final bitstream can be shipped world wide.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> So companies, that has HQ/support/testing in USA, but most programmers in
> e.g. India, can't share the same licence server? Even through VPN? It is
> basically possible, but out of the licence?

If the developers are in India then the licenses should be based in
India.  In most cases support and testing roles would have no need for
licenses to the EDK or IP cores.

This is really a conversation that is best suited for your Sales
person than the internet.

Ed McGettigan
--
Xilinx Inc.

Article: 151710
Subject: EDK 10.1 design
From: valtih1978 <inte..j@yandex.ru>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 10:16:40 +0300
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I have also reconstructed the EDK 10.1 inferred controller from example NGR 
file is available at https://wiki.ittc.ku.edu/rtrjvm/EDK_and_MD

The circuit is
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-
lbrLUp89H50/TcgOHuzzEEI/AAAAAAAAACw/j2WU_uNrxOk/s1600/feedback%2Bclocking.png

I do not see it among the Xilinx Memory Interface App Notes. Is it better? 
Here again, commands are generated in phase with sys_clk andthe length of 
the internal feedbacks is the thing to know.

The FB pin seems to be in phase with CLK0 at SDRAM. Why its 90 deg shifted 
version is used for clocking the receiving part? Since it does not account 
for the backward trace length from SDRAM to FPGA (the time traveled by data) 
but CLK and strobes must be in phase, wouldn't it be better to use one of 
the strobes for clocking? Instead, they use the strobe as clock enable in 
FIFO! Isn't it curious?



Article: 151711
Subject: Re: Why feedback clock in SDRAM controllers?
From: valtih1978 <inte..j@yandex.ru>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 12:50:10 +0300
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
> 
> In the first app note you reference figure 8 shows the feedback for
> the DCMs.  This feedback allows the delay getting to the IO pins to be
> calibrated out.  If the feedback also includes the delay of the clock
> path from the FPGA to the DIMM this delay will also be calibrated
> out.  I expect this is important in reading data from the DIMM.

"Calibrate out" is too general term. I understand that DCM allows to have 
some points "in phase". I want to know why this is done in these cases. 

It is a XUPV2p board and the extranal feedback trace length is identical to 
CK.



Article: 151712
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: "Nial Stewart" <nial*REMOVE_THIS*@nialstewartdevelopments.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 13:59:13 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
> You have misunderstood what a "site license" means. This means that
> the software or IP can be used within the limited physical distance of
> the license server and not within a national or world basis for the
> company that purchased the license.


I presume this is to stop multi-national companies having _one_ license
to cover wordwide development? (This isn't really a practical proposition
but is the extreme case)


Nial




Article: 151713
Subject: USB support for XUPV2P
From: Manusha <manusha1980@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 07:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Does any one know an add on card that can be used with XUPV2P?

Article: 151714
Subject: Re: Why feedback clock in SDRAM controllers?
From: rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 09:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 7, 3:02=A0pm, valtih1978 <inte...@yandex.ru> wrote:
> I see it in many SDRAM controllers, e.g.ftp://ftp.xilinx.com/pub/applicat=
ions/xapp/xapp608.pdf, and nobody explains
> WHY
>
> The extranal feedback trace must equal to CK len. Ok. This means that SDR=
AM
> will be clocked in phase with the FPGA system. How does it ensure that
> cmd/addr arrives to SDRAM in proper time, half cycle earlier of CK?
>
> In the more recommended xapp266 and xapp253, the external feedback is not
> used. Why? What is the purpose of the second, internal DLL? What should b=
e
> the len of feedback in this case?
>
> In these designs, the read DQ is clocked directly by DQS. Yet, DQ is chan=
ged
> simultaneously with DQS. This ensures the setup/hold violation! The "HOW =
TO
> USE DDR SDRAM" says: "when controller receives read data from DDR SDRAM, =
it
> will internally delay the received strobe to the center of the received d=
ata
> window." I do not see any delay!
>
> Thanks

In the first app note you reference figure 8 shows the feedback for
the DCMs.  This feedback allows the delay getting to the IO pins to be
calibrated out.  If the feedback also includes the delay of the clock
path from the FPGA to the DIMM this delay will also be calibrated
out.  I expect this is important in reading data from the DIMM.

But I'm a bit unclear about why the feedback does not include the
delay of the read data PCB traces as well.  Data going to the DIMM
does not need to consider the trace delay because both clock and data
see the same delay (if the board is designed that way).  But the read
data path delay actually consists of the clock path to the DIMM as
well as the read data path back to the FPGA.

Perhaps I didn't read the app note correctly.  These things can be a
little hard to interpret until you completely understand their
terminology.

Rick

Article: 151715
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 10:06:14 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 8, 10:26=A0pm, Alexander Kane <ajpk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You have misunderstood what a "site license" means. This means that
> > the software or IP can be used within the limited physical distance of
> > the license server and not within a national or world basis for the
> > company that purchased the license.
>
> > The final bitstream can be shipped world wide.
>
> Thanks for clearing this up for me.
>
> > 1) You will have a lot of headaches using Xilinx EDK. MicroBlaze is not=
 a
> > softcpu to start with.
> > 2) You can use LatticeMico32 softcpu (which is free) on Altera or Xilin=
x
> > FPGAs. E.g. check the opensource project "Milkymist", they're running L=
M32
> > softcpu on Spartan-6.
> > 3) You can use Nios II/e (economy), which is also free, but I am not su=
re it
> > could handle network speeds.
>
> > Anyway, I would definitely go for Altera, but if You're interested in X=
ilinx
> > devices, then go to MIlkymist page. They've developed memory controller=
 +
> > ethernet mac + many other cores.
>
> In regards to point (1) this is obviously your opinion, I was
> wondering if anyone else would like to comment on this.

I think he may be getting MicroBlaze  mixed up with PicoBlaze or even
the PowerPC versions of the Vertex CPUs.  To the best of my knowledge
both PicoBlaze and MicroBlaze CPUs are soft cores.  The MicroBlaze is
fully synthesized while the PicoBlaze is structural HDL which
instantiates the LUTs and FFs rather than inferring them.  But that
does not make the PicoBlaze CPU a hard core.


> I am aware that LatticeMico32 is free, but I understand that an
> optimised version is available for Lattice FPGAs (so it would make
> sense to use it with a Lattice FPGA), whereas to use it on other FPGAs
> you have to deal with a Verilog dump. =A0I'm just a little weary of
> learning Verilog while working on this project. =A0Furthermore I have
> heard that the community support for LatticeMico32 is poor.

I've never dug into the details of the Lattice Micro32, but what do
you mean by Verilog "dump"?  Verilog is actually q

> Also is someone able to confirm about pricing for Nios II? (see first
> post)


Article: 151716
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 10:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 9, 1:06=A0pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 8, 10:26=A0pm, Alexander Kane <ajpk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > You have misunderstood what a "site license" means. This means that
> > > the software or IP can be used within the limited physical distance o=
f
> > > the license server and not within a national or world basis for the
> > > company that purchased the license.
>
> > > The final bitstream can be shipped world wide.
>
> > Thanks for clearing this up for me.
>
> > > 1) You will have a lot of headaches using Xilinx EDK. MicroBlaze is n=
ot a
> > > softcpu to start with.
> > > 2) You can use LatticeMico32 softcpu (which is free) on Altera or Xil=
inx
> > > FPGAs. E.g. check the opensource project "Milkymist", they're running=
 LM32
> > > softcpu on Spartan-6.
> > > 3) You can use Nios II/e (economy), which is also free, but I am not =
sure it
> > > could handle network speeds.
>
> > > Anyway, I would definitely go for Altera, but if You're interested in=
 Xilinx
> > > devices, then go to MIlkymist page. They've developed memory controll=
er +
> > > ethernet mac + many other cores.
>
> > In regards to point (1) this is obviously your opinion, I was
> > wondering if anyone else would like to comment on this.
>
> I think he may be getting MicroBlaze =A0mixed up with PicoBlaze or even
> the PowerPC versions of the Vertex CPUs. =A0To the best of my knowledge
> both PicoBlaze and MicroBlaze CPUs are soft cores. =A0The MicroBlaze is
> fully synthesized while the PicoBlaze is structural HDL which
> instantiates the LUTs and FFs rather than inferring them. =A0But that
> does not make the PicoBlaze CPU a hard core.
>
> > I am aware that LatticeMico32 is free, but I understand that an
> > optimised version is available for Lattice FPGAs (so it would make
> > sense to use it with a Lattice FPGA), whereas to use it on other FPGAs
> > you have to deal with a Verilog dump. =A0I'm just a little weary of
> > learning Verilog while working on this project. =A0Furthermore I have
> > heard that the community support for LatticeMico32 is poor.
>
> I've never dug into the details of the Lattice Micro32, but what do
> you mean by Verilog "dump"? =A0Verilog is actually q

I seem to have fat fingered this post before I was done typing.

Verilog is actually quite easy to pick up.  If the code is already
written I would not expect it to be at all hard to compile.  What do
you mean when you say there is an "optimized" version for Lattice
devices?  Do you mean they have a pre-compiled version?


> > Also is someone able to confirm about pricing for Nios II? (see first
> > post)

Can't help you there.  Wouldn't it be a good idea to talk to Altera
for pricing?

Rick

Article: 151717
Subject: Re: USB support for XUPV2P
From: NeedCleverHandle <d_s_klein@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 10:50:11 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 9, 7:24=A0am, Manusha <manusha1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does any one know an add on card that can be used with XUPV2P?

RTFM: <http://www.xilinx.com/univ/XUPV2P/Documentation/ug069.pdf>

Look for the text "for a list of expansion boards that are compatible"
- it's in there.

Article: 151718
Subject: fpga
From: bashir2000 <user@compgroups.net/>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 14:17:47 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello dear all,

I have run into a problem regarding the FPGA. The FPGA output signal amplitude is 3.3, and to drive my switches, I need to increase the voltage up to 15 V. I am using TC4427(dual power mosfet driver)as a buffer after FPGA , and would like to check the possibility of my gate driver, but whenever I wanna check it, the FPGA pin is destroyed. I personally believe a resistance is required in series with the IC. Could you please give me a hand with this problem if you do not mind?
I highly appreciate your prompt answer.

Best Regards,
Bashir



Article: 151719
Subject: Re: fpga
From: glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 19:42:14 +0000 (UTC)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
bashir2000 <user@compgroups.net/> wrote:
 
> I have run into a problem regarding the FPGA. The FPGA output 
> signal amplitude is 3.3, and to drive my switches, I need to 
> increase the voltage up to 15 V. I am using TC4427(dual power 
> mosfet driver)as a buffer after FPGA , and would like to check 
> the possibility of my gate driver, but whenever I wanna check it, 
> the FPGA pin is destroyed. I personally believe a resistance is 
> required in series with the IC. 

My first thought is that anyone who doesn't know enough electronics
to figure this out doesn't belong anywhere near and FPGA.

I hope the FPGAs aren't too expensive!

> Could you please give me a hand with this problem if you do not mind?
> I highly appreciate your prompt answer.

Well, it looks like the input to the TC4427 should be less than
one microamp, and that Vih of 2.4V should be fine.  Vin is
allowed to go all the way up to Vdd (15V in your case), though 
even so it would usually be that 3.3V would be fine.

I would triple check that you wired up the TC4427 right.
If you do it wrong, it might put 15V into the FPGA pin, which
would quickly destroy it.

If speed isn't to important, a resistor should be fine on
the output.  With 12pF input capacitance, a resistor won't
slow you down too much, and will protect the FPGA.  A big enough
resistor should protect you up to 15V.

-- glen


Article: 151720
Subject: Re: Win an Altera DE0-Nano (Cyclone IV Dev Kit)!
From: NeedCleverHandle <d_s_klein@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 19:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 6, 10:20=A0pm, allen <ayho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi RK and Torfinn,
>
> I'm sorry you feel that way about FaceBook. For us, it's a convenient
> way to reach out to customers directly by sharing content such as
> videos, pictures, news to everyone who is a part of our Terasic
> FaceBook page. It's simply a platform for expression of interest and
> the latest FPGA platform news, so you are right about that.
>
> As for people who abstain from using FaceBook (which I can understand
> completely), we are also constantly looking for ways to interact
> directly with FPGA designers, such as through forums, our webpage,
> etc.
>
> As always, if you have any suggestions, we would always certainly
> appreciate them.
>
> Thanks,
> Allen
>
> On May 5, 2:58=A0am, NeedCleverHandle <d_s_kl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 3, 2:37=A0am, allen <ayho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Hey guys!
>
> > > Terasic Technologies is holding a contest to WIN the newly released
> > > Altera DE0-Nano! Head over tohttp://www.terasic.com.tw/events/DE0_Nan=
o_Contest/
> > > to leave a comment and win one today!!!
>
> > > Thanks,
> > > Allen Houng
> > > Terasic Technologieswww.terasic.com
>
> > Mr. Allen Houng,
>
> > FaceBook? =A0Really?
>
> > If you were interested in the hobby market, FaceBook might be the
> > right place. =A0Sadly, my vision of combined FaceBook and FPGAs looks a
> > lot like someone living in his mother's basement building geeky toys.
>
> > I like to be professional with my FPGA work.
>
> > RK.

How about LinkedIn?  It has FPGA groups (but honestly, I don't read
them).

Altera has a good wiki - that one I do read, and IIRC, that's how I
found TerAsic in the first place.

Right here - comp.arch.fpga - I feel that it's OK to have a reasonable
number of product announcements here.  It looks to me like Brand-X
monitors this board for advertising/customer relation benefit.  (No
problem with that - helping people so that they buy more product is
how industry is supposed to work.)

And don't you have a data base of customers on your web site?
Shouldn't be too hard to add potential customers.

Just a couple of thoughts,
RK

Article: 151721
Subject: Re: fpga
From: "RCIngham" <robert.ingham@n_o_s_p_a_m.n_o_s_p_a_m.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 06:01:01 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
>Hello dear all,
>
>I have run into a problem regarding the FPGA. The FPGA output signal
amplitude is 3.3, and to drive my switches, I need to increase the voltage
up to 15 V. I am using TC4427(dual power mosfet driver)as a buffer after
FPGA , and would like to check the possibility of my gate driver, but
whenever I wanna check it, the FPGA pin is destroyed. I personally believe
a resistance is required in series with the IC. Could you please give me a
hand with this problem if you do not mind?
>I highly appreciate your prompt answer.
>
>Best Regards,
>Bashir
>

Reading the datasheet, I would not expect that a series resistor is
required, although one should not prove to be a problem (33 or 47 ohm,
probably).

Double check the connections.

Could the MOSFET switching cause a power supply glitch to the FPGA?
	   
					
---------------------------------------		
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com

Article: 151722
Subject: Re: Why feedback clock in SDRAM controllers?
From: rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 9, 5:50=A0am, valtih1978 <inte...@yandex.ru> wrote:
> > In the first app note you reference figure 8 shows the feedback for
> > the DCMs. =A0This feedback allows the delay getting to the IO pins to b=
e
> > calibrated out. =A0If the feedback also includes the delay of the clock
> > path from the FPGA to the DIMM this delay will also be calibrated
> > out. =A0I expect this is important in reading data from the DIMM.
>
> "Calibrate out" is too general term. I understand that DCM allows to have
> some points "in phase". I want to know why this is done in these cases.
>
> It is a XUPV2p board and the extranal feedback trace length is identical =
to
> CK.

If you don't adjust the phase to align the clock to the timing of the
return data your clock speed will be limited by the round trip delay
path. That's also why they use a 90 degree phase relationship between
the output clock and the input clock.  That puts the sample time in
the middle of the data stable time.

Rick

Article: 151723
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: Jon Beniston <jon@beniston.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 15:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
> I am aware that LatticeMico32 is free, but I understand that an
> optimised version is available for Lattice FPGAs (so it would make
> sense to use it with a Lattice FPGA), whereas to use it on other FPGAs
> you have to deal with a Verilog dump.

Not true. The RTL is available and it's the same code for any FPGA
(apart from the memories).

Cheers,
Jon

Article: 151724
Subject: Re: Soft Processors and Licensing
From: NeedCleverHandle <d_s_klein@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 18:07:48 -0700 (PDT)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On May 6, 5:11=A0pm, Alexander Kane <ajpk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I understand that to use the MicroBlaze processor you either need to
> purchase the ISE Embedded Edition or purchase Platform Studio and the
> Embedded Development Kit (and use it with ISE WebPACK). =A0However from
> what I can find out it says that you're free to put MicroBlaze
> processors on as many devices as you wish so long as they remain on
> site. =A0I can't find any information about what type of license you
> need to include MicroBlaze in a product being sold.
>

There is a version of the uBlaze that's shipped in an XAPP - you just
instantiate a core, and use GCC for development.  No EDK needed.

My understanding is that the generated bitstream using any flavor of
uBlaze is without any additional cost (provided that it's used in a
Xilinx chip.)

> In the case of Nios II, you can use and develop with the Nios II with
> the Quartus II Web Edition because it comes with the OpenCore license
> that lets you use IP on an Altera FPGA so long as your development
> board is plugged in to the PC (I assume it doesn't matter who's
> hardware you use). =A0The e variant you can use for free, but the other
> variants require a license to work when disconnected. =A0The license you
> need is IP-NIOS, and though I can't find an official price listing
> anywhere I've seen $US500 being mentioned on forums... and presumably
> this allows you to sell as many products as you wish with Nios II
> processors on them?
>

There's a Free-NIOS now.  It's not as "good" as the payfor-NIOS, but
it works just fine.

> I've stated a whole bunch of assumptions here and I'd appreciate it if
> someone could tell me if I'm on the right track.
> Any advice on choosing between MicroBlaze and Nios II, or is there
> another option I'm missing?
> My company wants to spend as little as possible on licensing and/or
> development tools (this is their first time using an FPGA in a
> product), but my time is effectively free to them (I'm there under a
> research grant). =A0That said, I know the free way is usually the hard
> way so if I can make a compelling case for them to spend money it may
> make my life a lot easier.

Don't ignore OpenCores.  There are a couple of processors there (MIPS,
OpenRISC, etc) that are portable to and supported by GCC variants.

IMnsHO, the value add for NIOS and uBlaze is the ease (speed) of
development - When you graduate you'll find that time goes from "free"
to "priceless".

RK



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