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 102250

Article: 102250
Subject: Re: How to decide Fanout limit?
From: "John_H" <johnhandwork@mail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 15:22:57 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"srini" <g.shrinivasan@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1147439140.316222.317180@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> In Synplify Pro, there is a 'Fanout Guide' option. What is the
> reasonable value for this option? How to decide the Fanout value. Is
> there any thumb rule sort of thing for this?
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Srini.

I don't think there's any one answer.  For my designs where I keep the 
timing tight and the logic cones short, the fanout limit often causes more 
problems than it solves.  Since the Xilinx architecture I target has drivers 
at each node when the signal splits off in a chaotic tree to get to all the 
destinations, there isn't a "load" that makes the signal less reliable as 
the situation might be when loading many inputs off a physical wire.

If your target architecture has fanout recommendations, consider those.  If 
the timing analysis from your back end tools (and from SynplifyPro) suggest 
you're fine with timing, don't worry about fanout unless experience or 
literature suggests there's a problem.

When I have one signal feeding every bit in multiple adders, for instance, 
the signal is cleanly distributed in my FPGA yet the number of connections 
would cause the fanout limit to replicate.  As with register duplication, 
this second signal is too-often combined with the original signal to make a 
4-input LUT break out into 2 levels of logic because there are now 5 signals 
for the function, two of which are exact copies.

I'd like to see reasons anyone else might choose to apply a real fanout 
limit. 



Article: 102251
Subject: Re: How to check IOB register packing?
From: "John_H" <johnhandwork@mail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 15:24:52 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"srini" <g.shrinivasan@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1147421219.221889.122660@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I am using the "syn_useioff = 1" directive in my top module to pack the
> Input/Output registers into the IOB and synthesizing using Synplify
> Pro. For PAR, I am using Xilinx ISE 7.1
> I would like to know how to check and see whether the input and output
> registers are packed in the IO blocks after PAR.
> Also, I am tri-stating my outputs based on a control signal by using
> the following syntax in verilog : out_data = 16'bz. So, I want to check
> whether the tri-state buffers and the output registers are placed in
> the same IOB. Can this be done? Some people are telling that this
> verilog syntax will not actually tri-state the outputs in
> implelementation and I have to specifically instantiate the tri-state
> buffers from Xilinx. Can anyone clarify me about this?
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Srini.

Me, I like to have an OFFSET OUT AFTER constraint that gives a Tco value 
slightly larger than the guaranteed clock-to-out time for my I/O standards. 
If I don't have a register packed in the IOB, there's a failure in the 
timing constraint. 



Article: 102252
Subject: Re: How to check IOB register packing?
From: Joseph Samson <user@example.net>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 16:02:29 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
srini wrote:
> Hi,
> In the map report file, all the input and output signals are listed
> under the IOB name column in the IOB properties section. But under the
> reg(s) column, only my clock outputs have the OFF1 entry and all other
> input and ouput signals have no entry of IFF/OFF/ENFF. What does it
> mean?
> 
It means that those IOs aren't registered in the IOB. If you want to 
figure out why, I suggest you search comp.arch.fpga.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.arch.fpga/search?group=comp.arch.fpga&q=iob+register&qt_g=1&searchnow=Search+this+group


---
Joe Samson
Pixel Velocity

Article: 102253
Subject: Re: How to check IOB register packing?
From: "Symon" <symon_brewer@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 17:07:29 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"John_H" <johnhandwork@mail.com> wrote in message 
news:8N19g.698$oa1.536@news02.roc.ny...
>
> Me, I like to have an OFFSET OUT AFTER constraint that gives a Tco value 
> slightly larger than the guaranteed clock-to-out time for my I/O 
> standards. If I don't have a register packed in the IOB, there's a failure 
> in the timing constraint.
Neat! 



Article: 102254
Subject: Synchronous Scrambler
From: "Colin Hankins" <colinhankins@cox.net>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 09:49:24 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Does anyone know of any good papers describing methods and or algorithms for 
implementing a Synchronous Scrambler (LFSR) in parallel?

Thanks. 



Article: 102255
Subject: Re: sqrt(a^2 + b^2) in synthesizable VHDL?
From: "Slurp" <slip@slop.slap>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 17:57:13 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

<gaurav.vaidya2000@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1147381389.917103.41120@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If you are targetting programmable hardware (which you most possible
> are), you can get IP cores to work for you. Check out opencores.org or
> Xilinx or Altera websites to find cores that provide functions you need.
>

The Square root function is available as a free megafunction in Altera 
Quartus. I have just used it as part of my new 32 bit embedded processor 
design in a Stratix part.

A 32 bit square root with a 4 clock pipeline runs in excess of 40MHz in a C7 
part.


Slurp 



Article: 102256
Subject: Re: Synchronous Scrambler
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:12:11 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
http://www.xilinx.com/bvdocs/appnotes/xapp220.pdf

Might be useful?

Austin

Colin Hankins wrote:

> Does anyone know of any good papers describing methods and or algorithms for 
> implementing a Synchronous Scrambler (LFSR) in parallel?
> 
> Thanks. 
> 
> 

Article: 102257
Subject: Re: More Xilinx S/W problems... ISE won't start
From: briwalk@gmail.com
Date: 12 May 2006 11:22:38 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I've been running into a similar problem recently.  For me, ISE would
freeze after the prompt that asked if I wanted to unlocked the project
file, or would just never load (and eat up 99% of the CPU).

It seems to work if I replace the .ise file with a backed-up .ise file,
then actually delete the .lock file before starting up ISE.  From
browsing Xilinx support it looks like there may be issues with ISE
corrupting the .ise file on a crash.  I'd recommend keeping your own
backup (NOT the automatic backup) of the .ise file.  Wonder why could
they didn't just keep the project file a simple ASCII file like the old
.npl?

I agree that ISE stability has gone downhill.  Altera had a lot of
customers defect after their first buggy Quartus tools--Xilinx should
take note.

Brian Walkington


Article: 102258
Subject: Re: Multiple Write Port Register Files
From: "Luke" <lvalenty@gmail.com>
Date: 12 May 2006 11:55:08 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Yeah, I looked into using that.  It actually gets pretty expensive,
seems to have an exponential cost related to the number of write ports
for the XOR scheme.  It is a very interesting solution though.

I have a multiple-port reorder buffer that uses partitioning to
implement multiple ports, which is very efficient.  The reorder buffer
writes up to four entries at a time into the register file.  So I'll
just use time-multiplexing for the register file and hide the extra
cycle of latency it takes to update the register file by keeping the
data in the reorder buffer an extra cycle.


Article: 102259
Subject: ISE 7.1 synthesis problems
From: "Hari Kannan" <hkannan@stanford.edu>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 12:23:27 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi all,

I'm trying to synthesize a design using ISE 7.1 and am getting segmentation 
faults. The .srp file only gives me the foll message:

make: *** [leon3mp.ngc] Segmentation fault

How do I debug this? Has anybody encountered segmentation faults before? 
There isn't anything else in the warnings etc that could indicate a seg 
fault being imminent.

Thanks!



Article: 102260
Subject: Re: JTAG tutorial
From: "Jean Nicolle" <jean.nicolle@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 19:28:22 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Thanks!

Ok, I fixed a few instances of the numbers.

<MikeShepherd564@btinternet.com> wrote in message 
news:eud862pue2p4m6u274up9jj7qhp8si0ena@4ax.com...
> >I created a small tutorial about JTAG...
> http://www.fpga4fun.com/JTAG.html
>>
>>...happy to hear about mistakes/suggestions...
>
> I haven't read it in detail, so I won't comment on the content, but I
> like the style.  It's well-paced.  It's concise.  It doesn't have
> unnecessary and confusing repetition.  It's laid out clearly with good
> diagrams.  Most articles fail on all these points.
>
> I'd only say that it's best to avoid writing small numbers (1-10) and
> non-exact numbers as digits.  E.g. it's easier to read "a few
> thousand...three inputs and one output" than "a few 1000...3 inputs,
> and 1 output".
>
> Mike 



Article: 102261
Subject: Re: JTAG tutorial
From: "Jean Nicolle" <jean.nicolle@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 19:29:56 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Correct.

I actually know only one flash that can be programmed through JTAG (Platform 
flash, made by ST, sold by Xilinx). So I'm a little optimistic in my 
webpage.
Anyone knows if we can get these flash from ST directly? or another source?

"Ad" <adam.taylor@eads.com> wrote in message 
news:1147441764.754114.86100@d71g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Eli
>
> most flash devices do not have a JTAG port but can still be programmed
> via JTAG by ensuring all the pins of the flash chip which are required
> address, data, and control signals are connected to a device which does
> have a boundary scan port. Unused fpag pins are good for this. The JTAG
> software can then control the FPGA pins connected to the flash to write
> data into the flash device. If you are going to do it this way it is
> often necessary to take the WE pin to a spare pin on the JTAG header to
> enable the speed of the programming to be quicker.
>
> hope this helps
>
> Ad
> 



Article: 102262
Subject: Re: ISE 7.1 synthesis problems
From: "unfrostedpoptart" <david@therogoffs.com>
Date: 12 May 2006 13:16:58 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
> I'm trying to synthesize a design using ISE 7.1 and am getting segmentation
> faults. The .srp file only gives me the foll message:
>
> make: *** [leon3mp.ngc] Segmentation fault
>
> How do I debug this? Has anybody encountered segmentation faults before?
> There isn't anything else in the warnings etc that could indicate a seg
> fault being imminent.

Windows? Unix? Linux?   What service packs installed?   Any reason you
can't move up to 8.1?  Did you search the Xilinx website for this
error?

 David


Article: 102263
Subject: Re: clock multiplier in spartan 2
From: "Gabor" <gabor@alacron.com>
Date: 12 May 2006 13:20:29 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Ashish wrote:
> >You can use a DLL or DCM for that; You could also search for Peter
> >Alfkes paper 'six easy pieces', chapter 4
>
> Yes thats simple trick. Thanks for your input.

Ashish,

If you decide to use the DLL (there is no DCM in Spartan 2) you should
be aware that the "lock" output of the DLL will not de-assert after the
initial lock, so you need a secondary means of detecting that lock
was lost.  When the DLL is not locked, the 2x clock output actually
runs at 1x the input clock.

The six easy pieces approach will not generate a 50% duty cycle
like the DCM.

There's always a trade-off...

Cheers,
Gabor


Article: 102264
Subject: Re: clock multiplier in spartan 2
From: "Peter Alfke" <peter@xilinx.com>
Date: 12 May 2006 14:09:36 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
The 6-easy-pieces XOR design works reliably, but it just generates one
pulse on each input transition, irrespective of that transition's
direction.
Therefore the doubled clock does not have a defined duty cycle, and two
adjacent output clocks (or pulses) may have different spacing, as a
result of a non-50% input duty cycle.
If these limitations are acceptable, it's a nice and simple/cheap way
to double the clock frequency, and it works down to as low a frequency
as you possibly might want.
Peter Alfke, Xilinx


Article: 102265
Subject: Re: difference of variable and signal
From: Jim_B <jim.big@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 21:51:58 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Sounds like an interview question.
There are a lot more differences, which go basically down to the 
concepts of VHDL. You can write pages about this. This is one of the 
best and most difficult to answer questions about VHDL IMHO.

YiQi wrote:
> What's the different between variable and signal?
> 
>                                                      variable
>               signal
> assignment operator:                         :=
>         <=
> share between  process:              key word"shared"
> yes
> 
> what else?
> 

Article: 102266
Subject: Re: Crossing clock domains
From: Philip Freidin <philip@fliptronics.com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 21:52:11 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On 9 May 2006 01:36:09 -0700, "ALuPin@web.de" <ALuPin@web.de> wrote:
>Hi newsgroup,
>
>I have observed a strange behaviour in our VHDL design:
>
>One signal goes low and stays low (133MHz clock domain)(No Reset case).
>That flag
>is synchronised with one FF into a 125MHz clock domain where
>a FSM is running. The flag (flag='0') is checked in one of the states
>of the FSM.
>
>When using one FF for synchronization the circuit shows strange
>behaviour, when
>using two FFs it works fine.
>
>I mean the flag does not show much activity, it becomes high or low and
>remains stable. So why should one FF not be sufficient for
>synchronization ?
>
>Any ideas ?
>
>Rgds
>André

The problem you are describing sounds a lot like metastability. You
can read about it here:

   http://www.fpga-faq.org/FAQ_Pages/0017_Tell_me_about_metastables.htm

In terms of timing analysis, the path for the flag signal (in the 133 MHz
domain) to the input of your first synchronizing flipflop (in the 125 MHz
domain) does not matter much, as the signal is crossing the clock domains.

The synchronizing FF can go metastable. You have to look VERY CAREFULLY at
what happens to this synchronized version of your flag. First you need to
look at the timing for this signal. At 125 MHz, you only have 8 ns.
Meeting this timing requirement is not enough! That is because you need
some additional time to resolve metastability. Your goal should be that
the routing delay (+ clock to output + setup time to FSM FF) is less than
5 ns. This would give you 3 ns of resolving time. Second, you should make
sure that when this flag changes, the change in the state machine's state
encoding only changes 1 FF.

The reason that 2 FFs works so much better, is that you get to do the
resolving between the two FFs, which if they are close together, may leave
as much as 5 ns resolving time.


Philip Freidin


Philip Freidin
Fliptronics

Article: 102267
Subject: Re: reverse engineering ?
From: "Weng Tianxiang" <wtxwtx@gmail.com>
Date: 12 May 2006 15:36:18 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi fpga,
I woudl like to tell two stories about the reverse engineering.
One story is about how auto thef in L.A. steal latest version of Toyota
Lexus car. The car has a wireless key mechanism. Without the key, i.e.,
without wireless signal the car cannot be started. L.A. Times reports
how smart the auto thef act. Very simple, and all procedure would be
done within one minute.
1. Broke the window (not necessarily broke the glass) and open car door
as usually they do;
2. Open hood cover;
3. Detach the wireless key module;
4. Install their own wireless key module matched with their key;
5. Close the hood;
6. Drive the car away.

2. Xilinx has applied all patents for its key encoding mechanisms:
 PAT. NO.  Title
1 6,965,675  Structure and method for loading encryption keys through a
test access port
2 6,957,340  Encryption key for multi-key encryption in programmable
logic device
3 6,415,032  Encryption technique using stream cipher and block cipher

4 6,212,639  Encryption of configuration stream
5 6,118,869  System and method for PLD bitstream encryption
6 5,970,142  Configuration stream encryption

With their circuits and their principle in hand and appropriate
ASIC/FPGA schematics knowledge, experiences and tools, it is certain
that you will be successful.to decode any code imbeded in the chip.

For any ASIC/FPGA design and manufacture companies it is a small thing
to do: decode their embedded code.

After careful reading their patents, one will know what the weakest
point is and how to do it.

Weng


Article: 102268
Subject: Re: reverse engineering ?
From: "dp" <dp@tgi-sci.com>
Date: 12 May 2006 18:05:34 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I don't have such an extensive experience of reverse
engineering like fpga, but here is what I once did.
While the Coolrunner was Philips, I liked it and asked
if I would be given the programming data. I got two files
which were most of it (at that point I thought I had it all).
I designed the device in and when I started to write my
logic compiler tool for it I discovered I missed the data
on how the multiplexing area (ZIA, they call it) worked.
By that time the switch to Xilinx was on, I knew neither
Peter nor Austin nor this newsgroup (long story why).
 So I took the Philips software, wrote a number (65, just looked)
of files which did various routings and wrote a software to
look at the Jedec files and build the map based on that.
Every new file eliminated possibilities and as they got
to 65, I had them all (actually I think I had 2-3 unknown
combinations which I just left unused). Well, it took
me 2 or 3 weeks to do it (working pretty hard, that is).
 In general, I tend to design new things and am not
interested in reverse engineering. In this case, though,
I had to do it  - I still have no wintel or whatever alien
software involved in my design process, from schematic
drawing through PCB design through JTAG testing &
programming to software development and I intend to
keep that as long as I can (having complete control
over all tools and stuff makes a great difference).
I have a wintel based laptop here which I use
as a browser and .pdf reader - since about a year.

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff               Transgalactic Instruments

http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------

P.S. Here is the JEDEC part of interest (one example):

   NOTE ZIA Decoder Array *
L40600 0000101101111111000110100100000001000010*
L40640 1111010111111110001011011100011101001011*
L40680 1111000001100010000000010100001101001011*
L40720 1111111110011101111111101010010000100100*

And here is the table which I generated:

http://tgi-sci.com/tgi/scm/ziarev.txt  (too wide to be posted here)


Article: 102269
Subject: Re: reverse engineering ?
From: Eric Smith <eric@brouhaha.com>
Date: 12 May 2006 19:05:09 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Weng Tianxiang wrote:
> 2. Xilinx has applied all patents for its key encoding mechanisms:
[...]
> With their circuits and their principle in hand and appropriate
> ASIC/FPGA schematics knowledge, experiences and tools, it is certain
> that you will be successful.to decode any code imbeded in the chip.

Assuming that you have an arbitrarily large amount of time, money, and
units of the device to be reverse engineered.  The latter is necessary
because failed attempts will generally cause the key to be lost.

> After careful reading their patents, one will know what the weakest
> point is and how to do it.

Certainly.  The weakest point is that the decryption key is stored
in RAM cells in the part.  All you have to do is extract the bits
from the RAM cells.  Piece of cake.  (Not!)

Article: 102270
Subject: Re: difference of variable and signal
From: "YiQi" <yiqihuang@gmail.com>
Date: 12 May 2006 23:32:51 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
thx, Jim,
Sorry, the examples are miss leading. My main concern is the different
during design flow.
Let me restate my question, During HDL synthesis, that's the difference
between them?
Will that make any different after synthesis(place & route)?


Article: 102271
Subject: Re: Synplify - Not satisfactory results with re-timing option
From: Phil Hays <Spampostmaster@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 06:29:22 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"srini" <g.shrinivasan@gmail.com> wrote:

>Can you tell me how to do Physical synthesis and bring in the routing
>delays for synthesis. I am using Xilinx ISE 7.1 for PAR. Can physical
>synthesis be done with it. How to bring in the routing delays from
>Xilinx PAR and use it for synthesis in Synplify Pro?

You may be able to vastly improve results by adding syn_keep or
syn_preserve or -routing to key signals, to prevent retiming where it
isn't helping.  Or by doing some manual retiming, and turning off the
automatic retiming.  Or floorplanning, often placing just a few items
is all that is needed.  Start with block rams, multipliers, or
registers at the ends of the failing path(s).  Or updating ISE to 8.1
and try "map -timing".  Try several things, see what works and doesn't
for your design.  I'd suggest trying these before spending more money
on a tool.

Otherwise, talk to Synplicity about "Synplify Premier".  Also, there
are other tools by Mentor (and others?), and I have no recent
experience to allow me to give good suggestions as to which to look
at.  However, the same warning applies:  Not all problems can be
solved by any tool.  You probably want to see if you can get an
evaluation version first.


--
Phil Hays


Article: 102272
Subject: Re: How to check IOB register packing?
From: Phil Hays <Spampostmaster@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 06:35:33 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com> wrote:

>Jim Wu wrote:
>
>> Another way to verify this is to open the ncd file in FPGA_EDITOR and
>> see what are put in the IOBs.
>> 
>> HTH,
>> Jim
>> http://home.comcast.net/~jimwu88/tools/
>> 
>Or look at the pad report, there is a column there indicating whether 
>the signal is registered or not for each pad.

Or set static timing constratints on all pins that can only be reached
with IOB FFs...


--
Phil Hays


Article: 102273
Subject: Re: Programming the JTAG flash in circuit
From: "Ulf Samuelsson" <ulf@a-t-m-e-l.com>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:51:53 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
wpiman@aol.com wrote:
> We have a Xilinx Flash (XCF series I believe) that we would like to
> program in circuit from a microcontroller in order to support field
> reconfigurability.  This flash has a JTAG backend.  We were thinking
> about using the GPIO ports on a microcontroller to wiggle the JTAG
> lines and load the new files that way.  Problem is we don't know much
> about the upper protocol involved in JTAG and the documentation seems
> hazy.  Has anyone done something similar?  Does software exist that
> will do this for us?
>
Why bother about a Configurator.
If you connect a std flash or SPI dataflash (AT45) to
a fast enough controller (AT91:-) you will be cheaper off..


> Thanks,
> WP

-- 
Best Regards,
Ulf Samuelsson
ulf@a-t-m-e-l.com
This message is intended to be my own personal view and it
may or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Nordic AB 



Article: 102274
Subject: Re: reverse engineering ?
From: "Weng Tianxiang" <wtxwtx@gmail.com>
Date: 13 May 2006 07:08:20 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi Eric,
10 years ago when I was in China, there was a Chinese electronics
company in Beijing boasting every kind of FPGA chips in the world could
be decrypted and I really believed it, because they had many products
copied from other manufactures' products without designing: just copy,
including copies of PCB, FPGA and software driver.

I estimate that their FPGA copy business would be going on without any
hurdle with latest Xilinx encryption algorithm and circuits. They don't
have an arbitrarily large amount of money, but they have smart
engineers, enough time and experiences for more than 20 years. For us
as outside observer, it may need an arbitrarily large amount of time,
money to start fresh, but for them, it is their business and really a
piece of cake!

And how they do their copy of FPGA is really another secret!

For Xilinx decryption circuit, there is a data input port and a data
ouptput port. Data input port has input plain bit stream and output
port has output encrypted code. One even doesn't have to read the key
data and just put a probe on the input port and another on clock, he
will get all data stream that is what I thought in theory when I was
reading Xilinx encryption circuit.

Xilinx encryption circuit is not an equavalence to P ?= NP in computer
complexity theory. The latter is an open problem pending for more than
30 years without any solution. Xilinx encryption circuit is only an
engineering circuit and it cannot be as reliable in encryption as the
algorithm they used.

Weng




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