1994 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 1995 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1995 1996 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1996 1997 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 1998 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1998 1999 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1999 2000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2000 2001 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 2002 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2002 2003 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2003 2004 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2004 2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2005 2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2008 2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2009 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 2013 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 2014 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 2015 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 2016 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016 2017 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017 2018 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018 2019 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2019 2020 Jan Feb Mar Apr May 2020

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 22125

Article: 22125
Subject: Foundation 2.1i
From: Jamil Khatib <jamilkhatib75@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 11:26:42 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
As I know the foundation i  version has some internet "Java based"
cabibilities.
Can I install it  on a server then allow group of designers to use it
over the internet not only on local network?

Thanks
Jamil Khatib


Article: 22126
Subject: Re: xilinx --> altera vhdl
From: Egbert Molenkamp <molenkam@remove_thiscs.utwente.nl>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 11:52:17 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In the early days Viewlogic introduced, like many others, its own
multi-value
logic type: 'vlbit'. Viewlogic also added in 1990 a package 'pack1076' that
makes it possible to simulate the vlbit and related functions on other
platforms.
This package is still available in the current version of the Viewlogic
tooling. Look for the file 'pack1076.vhd' (probably you can find it in:
..\wvoffice\standard\VHDLLIBS\ )

Copying a file is often not allowed, but it is allowed for this file!
On 04-Mar-91 the copyright notice is removed.

You want to port your description to the IEEE standard logic type. But this
with
UNSIGNED MAGINUTED interpretation of the operands. There is also a function
'add2c', with twos complement interpretation of the operands.

The std_logic type (IEEE package std_logic_1164) does not include an
interpretation for the vector. So addition of std_logic_vector is not
possible.
You also need to use the package NUMERIC_STD (also an IEEE
standard since 1997). This package defines the type SIGNED and UNSIGNED,
similar to std_logic_vector but the arithmetic operators are supported.
(If your tool does not yet support this package, you can probably use
package
std_logic_arith).

There are a number of things that are to be taken care off, e.g.:
- v1d2int interpretates the operants as a twos complement number! (when I'm
corect,
it's a long time ago I used this package)
- addum interpretates de operands as an unsigned AND the output vector
includes
a carry bit. The length of the output is ONE LONGER then the longest input
vector. Whereas
in the package NUMERIC_STD the length of the result is the same as the
longest
input vector (NO carry is included).

Maybe this helps,

Regards,
Egbert Molenkamp
University of Twente
the Netherlands

Tobin Fricke wrote:

> Hello,
> I have a VHDL model written for a xilinx environment which uses the
> "vlbit" and "vlbit_1d" types, as well as operators such as "vld2int" and
> "addum".  I'd like to port this over to an altera environment (maxplus)
> and use IEEE standard logic, but I'm not sure what the analogous
> operations are for stdlogic and stdlogic_vector.  Could anyone help me
> out or point me in the right direction?  I found this question asked a
> couple times in the past on dejanews, but no solutions.
>
> Thanks,
> Tobin <tobin@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu>


Article: 22127
Subject: Re: Any good third-party place and route tools?
From: Jamil Khatib <jamilkhatib75@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 12:20:02 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
As far as I know there is now such tool, but there is a tool called vpr it
is free and opensource but it does not generate bitstreem file. but the
problem I do not remember anymore the http address

Jamil Khatib

Chris Plachta wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if there are any good third-party place and route tools
> for FPGAs out there.
>
> Specifically, I am looking for a tool that preserves the hierarchy and
> net names in the post-route database. I just finished an Altera design
> that had post-route timing problems, and we had no way of performing a
> good static timing analysis or post-route simulation since all of the
> registers and nets were renamed by the Altera tool, and there is no
> known mapping back to the original source code. We had to debug the
> problem in the lab.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Chris Plachta
> Alcatel USA
> Phone: 707-792-7271
> FAX:   707-792-6310


Article: 22128
Subject: High Gate count?
From: rja3 <rja3@ukc.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 12:28:16 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Could someone tell me why it is a disadvantage to have a high gate
count?

Article: 22129
Subject: Re: High Gate count?
From: John Ireland <john.ireland@philips.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 11:37:10 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
rja3 wrote:
>
> Could someone tell me why it is a disadvantage to have a high gate
> count?

Er, because you have to put them somewhere, and silicon costs money ?
--
Cheers,
John

________________________________________
Philips Semiconductors - CD Systems
mailto:John.Ireland@philips.com
Tel. +44 (0) 23 80312 667
FAX. +44 (0) 23 80316 304
________________________________________

Article: 22130
Subject: Re: Is there any DSP and FPGA based board suitable to motor drive
From: Komatose <koma_toseNOkoSPAM@hotmail.com.invalid>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 05:06:14 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
>>you can also do the PID or other control fucntion in the FPGA
>>and eliminate the processor,

I'm look for information on how to do just that. Can you point
me to sources of information onImplementing a PID controller
using a FPGA.

Thanx

Koma Tose

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!


Article: 22131
Subject: PID on FPGA
From: Komatose <koma_toseNOkoSPAM@hotmail.com.invalid>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 05:07:21 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
>>you can also do the PID or other control fucntion in the FPGA
>>and eliminate the processor,

I'm look for information on how to do just that. Can you point
me to sources of information for Implementing a PID controller
using a FPGA.

Thanx

Koma Tose

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!


Article: 22132
Subject: How to Prevent theft of FPGA design
From: "Dan" <daniel.deconinck@sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:43:09 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I design Xilinx FPGA based circuit boards.

Some of my customers in the past have copied and manufactured my boards to

How can I design my circuit boards to vastly reduce the chances of them
being copied. The main problem is the Xilinx bitstream is easy to copy.

Thanks Dan


Article: 22133
Subject: Re: Xilinx Virtex problem (schematic)
From: fliptron@netcom.com (Philip Freidin)
Date: 26 Apr 2000 16:05:09 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

I did a quick test design, and got the same error. IPAD connected to
both the input of an IBUF and an IFD. I agree this should work, and the
view in FPGA editor indicates that it should be possible. This type
of connection is often used in pulling apart a miltiplexed address/data
bus coming into a FPGA, and I know it works in all XC3K, and all XC4K
families. It certainly looks like the hardware in Virtex is designed to
support it too.

I expect that this will fail with VHDL and Verilog design entry too.

Looks like a bug. You should report it to Xilinx hotline, so they can
start on fixing it.

Philip

In article <01bfaf0c$176497c0$c4f262d1@Dan.i-tech.com>,
Dan Kuechle <dan_kuechle@i-tech.com> wrote:
>I'm trying to use an IBUF and an IFD on an input signal on a single pin.
>I know this is ok in the 4000 series, but I'm getting errors in Virtex:
>"ERROR:NgdHelpers:342 - input pad net "A_IN" drives multiple buffers".
>If I go into fpga editor it seems like I should be able to do this.
>Is this a S/W bug or is there a reason why I can't use both the IBUF
>and the IDF of an input pin?  I'm running F2.1I  on a PC.
>
>Thanks


Article: 22134
Subject: Re: Xilinx Virtex problem (schematic)
From: fliptron@netcom.com (Philip Freidin)
Date: 26 Apr 2000 16:10:05 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Johnny,
I agree with Dan, this is a bug. Please see my other posting on
this thread for details. The failing topology is NOT IPAD though an IBUF
to an IFD (which I agree is not valid), it is an IPAD connected to the
input of both an IBUF and an IFD, which should be valid.

Philip Freidin

In article <ee6c4e0.0@WebX.sUN8CHnE>, Johnny  <> wrote:
>Hello Dan,
>
>This is not a bug in the software.  The IFD is connected to an IPAD or an IOPAD (without using an IBUF).  This information is in the Libraries Guide which can be viewed at http://toolbox.xilinx.com/docsan/2_1i/data/common/lib/lib.htm
>
>Best Regards,
>Johnny
>Xilinx Customer Applications


Article: 22135
Subject: Re: How to Prevent theft of FPGA design
From: fliptron@netcom.com (Philip Freidin)
Date: 26 Apr 2000 16:15:28 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In article <h8EN4.148779$1C2.3655423@news20.bellglobal.com>, Dan <daniel.deconinck@sympatico.ca> wrote: >I design Xilinx FPGA based circuit boards. >Some of my customers in the past have copied and manufactured my boards to >avoid buying them from me. >How can I design my circuit boards to vastly reduce the chances of them >being copied. The main problem is the Xilinx bitstream is easy to copy. >Thanks Dan Get better customers?  Article: 22136 Subject: Re: Xilinx Virtex problem (schematic) From: "Bill Blyth" <bb@alphadata.co.uk> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 17:44:52 +0100 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> You can achieve this using schematics or HDL entry methods. Probably what you should consider is that constraints would apply to the design no matter how it was specified. Your design would be more flexible in this respect if you designed using IBUF and FD rather than IBUF and IFD and let the software decide the implementation based on these constraints. You can force an FD to be placed in an IOB (giving an IFD) by using map -pr b which places both input and output flip flops in the IOB's. IF you use the unregistered pin signal elsewhere in the design then the signal will bypass the IFD and you will have the result you were after. Bill Philip Freidin <fliptron@netcom.com> wrote in message news:8e743l$bnk$1@slb0.atl.mindspring.net... > > I did a quick test design, and got the same error. IPAD connected to > both the input of an IBUF and an IFD. I agree this should work, and the > view in FPGA editor indicates that it should be possible. This type > of connection is often used in pulling apart a miltiplexed address/data > bus coming into a FPGA, and I know it works in all XC3K, and all XC4K > families. It certainly looks like the hardware in Virtex is designed to > support it too. > > I expect that this will fail with VHDL and Verilog design entry too. > > Looks like a bug. You should report it to Xilinx hotline, so they can > start on fixing it. > > Philip > > > In article <01bfaf0c$176497c0$c4f262d1@Dan.i-tech.com>, > Dan Kuechle <dan_kuechle@i-tech.com> wrote: > >I'm trying to use an IBUF and an IFD on an input signal on a single pin. > >I know this is ok in the 4000 series, but I'm getting errors in Virtex: > >"ERROR:NgdHelpers:342 - input pad net "A_IN" drives multiple buffers". > >If I go into fpga editor it seems like I should be able to do this. > >Is this a S/W bug or is there a reason why I can't use both the IBUF > >and the IDF of an input pin? I'm running F2.1I on a PC. > > > >Thanks > >  Article: 22137 Subject: Re: Xilinx Virtex problem (schematic) From: Greg Neff <gregneff@my-deja.com> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:54:24 GMT Links: << >> << T >> << A >> In article <8e74ct$bs3$1@slb2.atl.mindspring.net>, fliptron@netcom.com (Philip Freidin) wrote: > > Johnny, > I agree with Dan, this is a bug. Please see my other posting on > this thread for details. The failing topology is NOT IPAD though an IBUF > to an IFD (which I agree is not valid), it is an IPAD connected to the > input of both an IBUF and an IFD, which should be valid. > > Philip Freidin > > In article <ee6c4e0.0@WebX.sUN8CHnE>, Johnny <> wrote: > >Hello Dan, > > > >This is not a bug in the software. The IFD is connected to an IPAD or an IOPAD (without using an IBUF). This information is in the Libraries Guide which can be viewed at http://toolbox.xilinx.com/docsan/2_1i/data/common/lib/lib.htm > > > >Best Regards, > >Johnny > >Xilinx Customer Applications > > I followed the link provided by Johnny, pushed down a little further, and found this: http://toolbox.xilinx.com/docsan/2_1i/data/common/lib/fig192.htm So then, it looks like the simultaneous IBUF and IFD is valid, but it must be specified differently for Spartan II and Virtex. It looks like you use a normal FD, and apply an attribute that says IOB = TRUE. See: http://toolbox.xilinx.com/docsan/2_1i/data/common/lib/lib12_6.htm#X83760 So it isn't a bug. It is only a highly annoying and non-portable change in methodology for specifying an IFD. -- Greg Neff VP Engineering *Microsym* Computers Inc. greg@guesswhichwordgoeshere.com Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.  Article: 22138 Subject: Re: PID on FPGA From: "Andy Peters" <apeters.Nospam@nospam.noao.edu.nospam> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:23:23 -0700 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> Komatose wrote in message <133bccca.3a116135@usw-ex0106-045.remarq.com>... >>>you can also do the PID or other control fucntion in the FPGA >>>and eliminate the processor, > >I'm look for information on how to do just that. Can you point >me to sources of information for Implementing a PID controller >using a FPGA. Do you know what a PID loop is? Can you write a block diagram for it? Can you write C code to implement it? Do you know an HDL? -- a ----------------------------------------- Andy Peters Sr Electrical Engineer National Optical Astronomy Observatories 950 N Cherry Ave Tucson, AZ 85719 apeters (at) noao \dot\ edu "Money is property; it is not speech." -- Justice John Paul Stevens  Article: 22139 Subject: Re: Xilinx Virtex problem (schematic) From: Greg Neff <gregneff@my-deja.com> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 17:25:24 GMT Links: << >> << T >> << A >> BTW, the reason for the error message is that the Virtex IFD macro instantiates an IBUF, and with Virtex it is illegal to have two IBUFs in the same IOB. So, you need an IBUF in series with an FDxx, where the FDxx has an attribute of IOB = TRUE. In other words, duplicate the IFD macro, but use IBUF output to feed you logic as well. This should produce the desired implementation. -- Greg Neff VP Engineering *Microsym* Computers Inc. greg@guesswhichwordgoeshere.com Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.  Article: 22140 Subject: Re: How to Prevent theft of FPGA design From: bob elkind <eteam@aracnet.com> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:51:59 -0700 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> Suggestions: 1. Add to your services contract the usual clauses about conflict arbitration, etc. 2. Add to your services contract clauses about "you retain all rights, production rights for intellectual property are available for a fee". 3. Enforce/defend your property rights. Retain and use a lawyer. If bitstreams were copied without reverse engineering, it should be pretty simple to establish the act of theft/copying (no source code, your honour ?). 4. Add little things like version number registers into the design which would help establish the origin and uniqueness of the design. 5. And the suggestion by another respondent is very very appropriate: pick better customers. Never do business with someone who doesn't honour/respect others. There are too many good/honourable clients out there. Eventually the irresponsible/dishonourable ones will need services, and noone competent will be willing to do business with them (including their own employees). -- Bob Elkind Dan wrote: > > I design Xilinx FPGA based circuit boards. > > Some of my customers in the past have copied and manufactured my boards to > avoid buying them from me. > > How can I design my circuit boards to vastly reduce the chances of them > being copied. The main problem is the Xilinx bitstream is easy to copy. > > Thanks Dan  Article: 22141 Subject: Help! going from ACTmap to Synplicity From: MikeJ <mriduljoshiNOmrSPAM@hotmail.com.invalid> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:19:06 -0700 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> Hi and please help... I am converting a design (inherited and 95% of the real-estate is full) from ACTmap to Synplify synthesis tool for a 54SX chip. Synplify seems to have reduced the real-estate usage to 78% (how??) but the final design which worked with the ACTmap path does not work with the sunplify path. I had to force synplify to not use global (HCLK) buffers to keep the pinout I needed. I know, this is not much to go on, but I hope some one has been there before! How can I gain almost 20% real-estate just by switching to synplify....what am I doing wrong???? Thanks... Mike * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!  Article: 22142 Subject: Looking for contract/consulting help From: "$ " <pwyckof@attglobal.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 20:22:53 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi,

I am interested in contracting out the
following HW + the accompanying software
drivers.  Please contct me via email if this
is something you might be interested in?

Thanks,
Peter Wyckoff
wyckoff@xpdisk.com

-----------------------------------------

------------------
|                |
|   PC #1        |
|   motherboard  |
|                |             ----------
|                |             |        |
|              *-|-------------|  IDE   |
|           (1)*-|-------------|  HD    |
|              *-|-------------|        |
|                |             |        |
------------------             ----------

(1) standard IDE (AT) host adapter

The above diagram shows a (host) PC
motherboard connected to a IDE HD via a
standard ribbon.  The above diagram is
standard; it is drawn to illustrate the next
thing. What I want to do is shown in the
diagram below.

------------------
|                |
|   PC #1        |    --------------
|   motherboard  |    |            |
|                |    | PC #2      |     ----------
|                |    |            |     |        |
|              *-|----|-*        *-|-----|  IDE   |
|           (1)*-|----|-*(2)  (1)*-|-----|  HD    |
|              *-|----|-*        *-|-----|        |
|                |    |            |     |        |
------------------    |            |     ----------
-------------
(1) standard IDE (AT) host adapter
(2) HW board, see below.

In a nutshell, I would like PC #2, in
conjunction with the HW board to pretend it
is a standard IDE hard drive to PC #1.

Specifically, I would like to add a new
motherboard between PC #1 and the disk.  The
job of this new motherboard, PC #2, is to
bridge the two devices and to execute a
proprietary algorithm - the algorithm is not
important.  What is important is to realize
that the PC #2 intercepts the read/write
requests directed to the HD, and processes
the requests as it chooses. The function of
the HW board (2 in the above diagram) is to
implement the disk-side of the ATA protocol,
and send the read/write requests to a
user-level process on PC #2.  Obviously the
HW board requires a device driver. The bus
the HW board plugs into can be any standard
bus (e.g., PCI, ISA --- I am not worried

I would prefer to run Linux on PC #2.
Clearly the items marked with "1" on the
diagram are standard IDE adapters (where a
ribbon plugs in).


Article: 22143
Subject: ? economical SPROM programmer for Xilinx
From: "Dan" <daniel.deconinck@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 00:33:55 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
The Data IO programmers cost $1500ish to program Xilinx SPROM. Does anyone know of a more reasonably priced one ? Thanks Dan  Article: 22144 Subject: Design Study From: "Richard B. Katz" <rich.katz@nospam.gsfc.nasa.gov> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 23:38:14 -0400 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> Hi, I am conducting a study on logic design practices and am now surveying the opinions of different designers in the field. A first set of circuits have been posted at url http://rk.gsfc.nasa.gov/DesignStudy.htm and are real; not academic exercises. They are implemented in Actel technology and were originally intended for the hi-rel environment without the potential for service or repair. What do you think of these circuits and design styles and practices? There are no severe performance or resource issues associated with these circuits and they operate at speeds that are reasonable for the technology. Please note that there are no names or organizations shown on these schematics as this is a technical exercise. Please send me your responses at rich.katz@NOSPAMPLEASE.gsfc.nasa.gov if you do not wish to post here. Thank you, Richard B. Katz National Aeronautics and Space Administration  Article: 22145 Subject: Re: Interface with Altera's LPM_RAM_IO && Multiple cycle instruction with Synplify?? From: "MK Yap" <mkyap@REMOVE.ieee.org> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 14:53:28 +0800 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> Hi!! This is what I get from Max+Plus2's help...... I really have no idea what that means.... & what I can do to solve the problem. In fact, I find that this warning mesg "Design doctor warning: Unknown combinatorial feedback structure detected at primitive 'lpm_RAM_IO:9|'altram:sram|segment0_4' " also occurs to my other bus (which is a bidir bus) I have sent the multiple cycles instructions to synplicity online help.. I'll see what they can do.... Any advice is much appreciated!! Rgds VHDL beginner ***** CAUSE: A network of cross-coupled logic cannot be identified. This logic is creating a latch, flipflop, or delay, and is not an Altera-provided primitive, megafunction,or macrofunction. You should use only the expander flipflop and expander latch macrofunctions provided with MAX+PLUS II. In addition, you should use these expander flipflop and expander latch macrofunctions only after all dedicated flipflop and latch resources in the device (i.e., logic cells and I/O cells) have been used. ACTION: If dedicated flipflop and latch resources are available in the device and the logic was a latch or flipflop function, replace it with LATCH or DFF primitive. If all dedicated resources have already been used, replace the logic with an equivalent Altera-provided expander macrofunction such as expdff or explatch. If this message occurs for a delay structure, redesign the network so that it does not depend on internal timing parameters. For an example of a good design alternative to a delay chain, see Delay Chain Examples. ***** <rajkumar@gdatech.com> wrote in message news:8dr97g$v7m$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Hi! > I dont know what this Warning means Top of my head. > But there is one way, Just double click on this warning, and MaxplusII > will give you the reasons for this warning. > Also it will tell you about the seriousness of the warning, and what > steps you need to take. > > As far as multicycle path or false path is concerned, i do not think > there is any way to make it known to the Altera MaxPlusII. > But i have heard ( never tried) Quartus tool, which probably has all > this features. > > > Rajkumar... > > In article <8dlmug$m4k$1@violet.singnet.com.sg>, > "MK Yap" <mkyap@REMOVE.ieee.org> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > [1] > > > > I'm writing VHDL codes using synplify (5.3.1) to interface with > Altera's > > LPM-RAM_IO (single IO port RAM).... I'm using Max+Plus2 9.3, device > > Flek10k100e > > > > During compilation, i encounter this warning message.... > > "Design doctor warning: Unknown combinatorial feedback structure > detected > > at primitive 'lpm_RAM_IO:9|'altram:sram|segment0_4' " > > > > During timing simulation, it works fine... but haven't tried out on > the real > > hardware platform yet... > > > > I believe the problem lies in the fact that the data bus is > bidirectional. > > In the VHDL module, it is always at the receiving end (config. as > input) > > unless it needs to write data to the RAM.... Pls advice on the warning > > message. > > > > [2] > > I have a simple code below... Since j is a 12 bit counter, the > execution (12 > > bit addition) is pretty slow. The maximum frequency this circuit can > work is > > ard 80+MHz on flex 10k100e-3... esp if there is an IF > statement..... > > To overcome this, I define a constraint > > define_multicycle_path -to {j[11:0]} 3 > > recompile and the max frequency improves to 137MHz (in synplify 5.3.1) > > > > I copied the edf and acf file to another directory and import to > altera > > max+plus2, recompile... but the timing analysis shows that the max > frequency > > this circuit can run is only 40+Mhz?????????? > > btw, I tried normal, fast & WYSIWYG, all shows frequency ard > 40-50MHz!!!!!! > > How can I tell explicitly max++2 that that is a multiple cycle > instruction > > or edf file has already taken care of that?? > > > > Pls advice. Thank you very much!!! > > > > Regards > > MK > > > > LIBRARY ieee ; > > USE ieee.std_logic_1164.all; > > USE ieee.std_logic_arith.all; > > USE ieee.std_logic_unsigned.all; > > > > ENTITY test IS > > PORT( > > nReset : in STD_LOGIC; > > MClk : in STD_LOGIC; > > FIFO_Data1 : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(15 downto 0); > > FIFO_Data2 : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(15 downto 0); > > FIFO_DataAvail : in STD_LOGIC; > > FIFO_Answer : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(15 downto 0); > > Cntr : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(11 downto 0) > > ); > > END test; > > > > ARCHITECTURE Controller OF test IS > > > > SIGNAL j : INTEGER RANGE 0 TO 2353; > > BEGIN > > > > MainInterface: PROCESS(nReset,MClk) > > BEGIN > > IF nReset='0' THEN > > j<=0; > > FIFO_Answer <=(OTHERS=>'0'); > > ELSIF (MClk'event AND MClk='0') THEN > > IF FIFO_DataAvail='1' THEN > > IF j=2352 THEN > > j <=0; > > ELSE > > j<=j+1; > > END IF; > > FIFO_Answer <= FIFO_Data1+FIFO_Data2; > > END IF; > > > > END IF; > > END PROCESS MainInterface; > > > > Cntr <=CONV_STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(j,12); > > END Controller; > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.  Article: 22146 Subject: Re: ? economical SPROM programmer for Xilinx From: felix_bertram@my-deja.com Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 07:05:02 GMT Links: << >> << T >> << A >> Dan, I wrote some simple software to program ATMEL AT17LV512 EEPROMs with Xilinx bitstreams. I am using a Xilinx Parallel Cable 3 to interface with the I2C bus, but any other hardware could do. Would this help? Best regards Felix In article <TVLN4.82050$2D6.2061048@news20.bellglobal.com>,
"Dan" <daniel.deconinck@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> The Data IO programmers cost $1500ish to program Xilinx SPROM. Does anyone > know of a more reasonably priced one ? > > Thanks Dan > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.  Article: 22147 Subject: Re: PID on FPGA From: Komatose <koma_toseNOkoSPAM@hotmail.com.invalid> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 00:29:46 -0700 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> >>Do you know what a PID loop is? Yes. >>Can you write a block diagram for it? Yes. >>Can you write C code to implement it? Yes. >>Do you know an HDL? I know ABEL - HDL and I'm learning VHDL. But I don't know much about FPGAs and that's where I was poping you could help. Thanks Koma Tose * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!  Article: 22148 Subject: Re: Buy FPGA From: rotemg@mysticom.com Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 08:39:52 GMT Links: << >> << T >> << A >> In article <MxUGOV2Poq+mZWykDEX+aNBcErxq@4ax.com>, Florindo Santoro <flosan@tin.it> wrote: > Where can I Buy the FPGAs chip ?(On line) > Try http://chipcenter.com You probably can get better price from your local dealer. Regards, Rotem ------------------------------------------------------------- Rotem Gazit MystiCom LTD. mailto:rotemg@mysticom.com http://www.mysticom.com ------------------------------------------------------------ Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.  Article: 22149 Subject: Re: ? economical SPROM programmer for Xilinx From: "Mike H." <mikeh@spamless.imageproc.com> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 09:43:43 +0100 Links: << >> << T >> << A >>  <felix_bertram@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8e8oqo$3cv\$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Dan,
>
> I wrote some simple software to program ATMEL AT17LV512 EEPROMs with
> Xilinx bitstreams. I am using a Xilinx Parallel Cable 3 to interface
> with the I2C bus, but any other hardware could do. Would this help?

Atmel sell a "cheap" programmer unit for their serial EEPROMs,
called the ATDH2200E. It plugs into a PC parallel port, and in the
UK it costs around £235.

MH.