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 20575

Article: 20575
Subject: Re: clock
From: Nicolas Matringe <nicolas@dotcom.fr>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 11:29:38 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"Benoît HAMON" a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to implemente (with "FOUNDATION implementation" in a Xilinx
> CPLD9500) a function in order to delay an output from an input ?.
>
> ex : clk_out <= clk_in after 10ns.
> I found many VHDL example in Web, but never implemented.

This is legal VHDL but it is not synthesizable. It is only used in
testbenches to generate stimuli.

> NB: my aim is to create a Clock multiplier  : 13MHz => 26MHz.
> Can someone please give me an example IMPLEMENTED ?.

I am no expert but I think a clock multiplier requires some analog
electronics (at least a tapped delay line)
This might be possible to do by cascading logic cells, each output being
a tap.

Nicolas MATRINGE           DotCom S.A.
Conception electronique    16 rue du Moulin des Bruyeres
Tel 00 33 1 46 67 51 11    92400 COURBEVOIE
Fax 00 33 1 46 67 51 01    FRANCE
(j'ecris en anglais pour le forum mais on peut m'ecrire en francais)

Article: 20576
Subject: Re: launching a FPGA cores start-up
From: fpgaer@my-deja.com
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 10:37:41 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Ray,

what's the market like for custom FPGA designs (ie; consultancy ) ?

In article <38A80ABE.33E78BB5@ids.net>,
Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net> wrote:
> My point is that there seems to be very little money in doing
commercial
> cores for FPGAs.  The silicon vendors have set the price point
expectations
> so low (free in many cases) that I suspect you will find little if any
> return on your investment especially after you factor in the cost of
> marketing and support.
>
> fpgaer@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > Ray,
> >
> >
> > I know that the FPGA core market is limited and is dominated by big
> > vendors. But would I be right in saying that this market is growing,
> > as the gate/price ratio is increasing (slowly) and with their
> > reconfigurable nature & the time-to-market FPGAs win over ASICs ?
> > To add to it the 'fabrication-from-foundary' cost factor attached to
> > ASICs disappears in FPGAs so that individuals can think of designing
> > complete working systems (an impossible taks when concidering
ASICs).
> > I see scenarios where ONLY FPGA's qualify in terms their
reconfigurable
> > nature - which are increasing by the day !
> >
> > Taking all the pros & cons and reasoning from the above points ( I'm
> > still not sure if they're right ! ), would it be a wise decision to
> > concentrate on the business ???
> >
> > In article <38A6E467.E85DCE58@ids.net>,
> >   Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net> wrote:
> > > Good luck.  From what I've seen, people are not willing to pay
much
> > for
> > > FPGA based cores.  Seems the silicon vendors have set the price
> > > expectations for cores well below the cost to develop, maintain
and
> > > support such cores.  Optimized FPGA cores are more difficult to
design
> > > than comparable cores in ASICs, yet the market price for FPGA
cores is
> > > orders of magnitude less than similar ASIC cores.
> > >
> > > fpgaer@my-deja.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > wld. appreciate if anyone cld. share their views on launching a
co.
> > > > which delivers custom-made FPGA cores ? Wld. the effort be worth
in
> > > > terms of time ( & money ) ...... specifically, is there a
demanding
> > > > market for FPGA cores ???
> > > >
> > > > Any comments wld. be highly appreciated !!!
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance........
> > > >
> > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > > Before you buy.
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Ray Andraka, P.E.
> > > President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> > > 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> > > email randraka@ids.net
> > > http://users.ids.net/~randraka
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>
> --
> -Ray Andraka, P.E.
> President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> email randraka@ids.net
> http://users.ids.net/~randraka
>
>

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

Article: 20577
Subject: Re: MULTIRATE DESIGN
From: Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 13:13:15 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
You should register the outputs in the IOBs whenever possible.  It
guarantees clock to output and input setup timing and decouples it from
the internal routing.  For the internal routing, the clock frequency you
are working at and the geographic separation of your outputs will
determine how much pipelining or duplication will be required.
Pipelining is adding registers to distribute long combinatorial delays
over several clock cycles, which allows you to increase the clock rate
and overall data rate at the expense of clock latency.  Duplication of
logic (in this case perhaps two or three identical address counters) can
reduce the delays attributed to fan out and long distance routes.
Finally, if your design needs sub-multiples of the master clock, you want
to use dividers and clock enables to produce the lower rate signals.

As far as the floorplanning goes, use it if your design is not meeting
timing or is not fitting in the part selected.

ritchie99_uk@my-deja.com wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> VIRTEX-E target.
>
> My design produces 12 parrallel outputs at once
> 4 are in the left edge, 4 are in the middle and 4 are in the right at
> decreasing rate.
>
> I have to use only one off-chip bank ram, hoping to succeed to design
>
> i am just wondering what's the appropriate way to route the different
> outputs, i mean more precisely how many delays i have to apply to the
> left, middle , and the right outputs which will feed my address-
> generator
>
> i am applying timing constraint only, (no placement constraint)
> do you think that i have to use the floorplanner, for example, and so
> orient by my-self the placement
>
> any help will be much appreciated
>
> regards
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

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


Article: 20578
Subject: Re: A FPGA hickup
From: Magnus Homann <d0asta@licia.dtek.chalmers.se>
Date: 15 Feb 2000 14:17:36 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Magnus Homann <d0asta@mis.dtek.chalmers.se> writes:

> Hello,
>
> One of the FPGA we are using (Xilinx, XCV300) sometimes has a small
> hickup. I would like to invite your opinion on where I should look
> first.
> [...]

Well,

I think we found a probelm with th design. You see, the Xilinx tools
doesn't want to calculate timing on asynchronous set/reset to clock
(on FFs). You have to enter some secret command in the .PCF file to
get this extra feature. Suddenly, our design _didn't_ meet timing
anymore.

So, why do we use asynch. set/reset? Well, Xilinx use them in the FIFO
core they provided for our use... A core that the timing tool can't
handle, unless told to. A core that the P&R tool can't do timing
driven P&R on.

Homann
--
Magnus Homann, M.Sc. CS & E
d0asta@dtek.chalmers.se

Article: 20579
Subject: Re: launching a FPGA cores start-up
From: Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 13:18:17 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>


fpgaer@my-deja.com wrote:

> Ray,
>
> what's the market like for custom FPGA designs (ie; consultancy ) ?

Right now there is plenty of opportunity for experienced FPGA designers,
although customers are not willing to pay anywhere near what they are
willing to pay for equivalent ASIC designs or experience.

>
>
> In article <38A80ABE.33E78BB5@ids.net>,
>   Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net> wrote:
> > My point is that there seems to be very little money in doing
> commercial
> > cores for FPGAs.  The silicon vendors have set the price point
> expectations
> > so low (free in many cases) that I suspect you will find little if any
> > return on your investment especially after you factor in the cost of
> > marketing and support.
> >
> > fpgaer@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > > Ray,
> > >
> > >
> > > I know that the FPGA core market is limited and is dominated by big
> > > vendors. But would I be right in saying that this market is growing,
> > > as the gate/price ratio is increasing (slowly) and with their
> > > reconfigurable nature & the time-to-market FPGAs win over ASICs ?
> > > To add to it the 'fabrication-from-foundary' cost factor attached to
> > > ASICs disappears in FPGAs so that individuals can think of designing
> > > complete working systems (an impossible taks when concidering
> ASICs).
> > > I see scenarios where ONLY FPGA's qualify in terms their
> reconfigurable
> > > nature - which are increasing by the day !
> > >
> > > Taking all the pros & cons and reasoning from the above points ( I'm
> > > still not sure if they're right ! ), would it be a wise decision to
> > > concentrate on the business ???
> > >
> > > In article <38A6E467.E85DCE58@ids.net>,
> > >   Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net> wrote:
> > > > Good luck.  From what I've seen, people are not willing to pay
> much
> > > for
> > > > FPGA based cores.  Seems the silicon vendors have set the price
> > > > expectations for cores well below the cost to develop, maintain
> and
> > > > support such cores.  Optimized FPGA cores are more difficult to
> design
> > > > than comparable cores in ASICs, yet the market price for FPGA
> cores is
> > > > orders of magnitude less than similar ASIC cores.
> > > >
> > > > fpgaer@my-deja.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > wld. appreciate if anyone cld. share their views on launching a
> co.
> > > > > which delivers custom-made FPGA cores ? Wld. the effort be worth
> in
> > > > > terms of time ( & money ) ...... specifically, is there a
> demanding
> > > > > market for FPGA cores ???
> > > > >
> > > > > Any comments wld. be highly appreciated !!!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks in advance........
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > > > Before you buy.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > -Ray Andraka, P.E.
> > > > President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> > > > 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> > > > email randraka@ids.net
> > > > http://users.ids.net/~randraka
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > Before you buy.
> >
> > --
> > -Ray Andraka, P.E.
> > President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> > 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> > email randraka@ids.net
> > http://users.ids.net/~randraka
> >
> >
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

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


Article: 20580
Subject: Re: launching a FPGA cores start-up
From: Rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 08:44:22 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Ray,

Can you give us some ball park numbers for rates for FPGA designers and
for ASIC designers?

Ray Andraka wrote:
>
> fpgaer@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > Ray,
> >
> > what's the market like for custom FPGA designs (ie; consultancy ) ?
>
> Right now there is plenty of opportunity for experienced FPGA designers,
> although customers are not willing to pay anywhere near what they are
> willing to pay for equivalent ASIC designs or experience.
>
> >
> >
> > In article <38A80ABE.33E78BB5@ids.net>,
> >   Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net> wrote:
> > > My point is that there seems to be very little money in doing
> > commercial
> > > cores for FPGAs.  The silicon vendors have set the price point
> > expectations
> > > so low (free in many cases) that I suspect you will find little if any
> > > return on your investment especially after you factor in the cost of
> > > marketing and support.
> > >
> > > fpgaer@my-deja.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ray,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I know that the FPGA core market is limited and is dominated by big
> > > > vendors. But would I be right in saying that this market is growing,
> > > > as the gate/price ratio is increasing (slowly) and with their
> > > > reconfigurable nature & the time-to-market FPGAs win over ASICs ?
> > > > To add to it the 'fabrication-from-foundary' cost factor attached to
> > > > ASICs disappears in FPGAs so that individuals can think of designing
> > > > complete working systems (an impossible taks when concidering
> > ASICs).
> > > > I see scenarios where ONLY FPGA's qualify in terms their
> > reconfigurable
> > > > nature - which are increasing by the day !
> > > >
> > > > Taking all the pros & cons and reasoning from the above points ( I'm
> > > > still not sure if they're right ! ), would it be a wise decision to
> > > > concentrate on the business ???
> > > >
> > > > In article <38A6E467.E85DCE58@ids.net>,
> > > >   Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net> wrote:
> > > > > Good luck.  From what I've seen, people are not willing to pay
> > much
> > > > for
> > > > > FPGA based cores.  Seems the silicon vendors have set the price
> > > > > expectations for cores well below the cost to develop, maintain
> > and
> > > > > support such cores.  Optimized FPGA cores are more difficult to
> > design
> > > > > than comparable cores in ASICs, yet the market price for FPGA
> > cores is
> > > > > orders of magnitude less than similar ASIC cores.
> > > > >
> > > > > fpgaer@my-deja.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wld. appreciate if anyone cld. share their views on launching a
> > co.
> > > > > > which delivers custom-made FPGA cores ? Wld. the effort be worth
> > in
> > > > > > terms of time ( & money ) ...... specifically, is there a
> > demanding
> > > > > > market for FPGA cores ???
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any comments wld. be highly appreciated !!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks in advance........
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > > > > Before you buy.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > -Ray Andraka, P.E.
> > > > > President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> > > > > 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> > > > > email randraka@ids.net
> > > > > http://users.ids.net/~randraka
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > > Before you buy.
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Ray Andraka, P.E.
> > > President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> > > 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> > > email randraka@ids.net
> > > http://users.ids.net/~randraka
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>
> --
> -Ray Andraka, P.E.
> President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> email randraka@ids.net
> http://users.ids.net/~randraka

--

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

remove the XY to email me.

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design

Arius
4 King Ave
Frederick, MD 21701-3110
301-682-7772 Voice
301-682-7666 FAX

Internet URL http://www.arius.com

Article: 20581
From: Dragon <hyarbr01@NoSpam.harris.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 09:34:39 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I used to do back annotation, but have since found static timing analysis
to be much more efficient with the design flows we experience. Too many
times I've func simmed, targeted, and back annotated only to have the
spec change the next day! Every time you place and route you had to
perform back annotated regression sims. Back annotation was causing
most of my headache and overtime. With static timing you can specify
one set of timing constraints that apply each and every time you reroute.

The only caveat is that your static timing analysis had damn well better
be right!!! If your analysis is incorrect you can have timing problems
even though your constraints are met. I will usually sit down with one
or two senior engineers and go through it with a fine tooth comb. It's
not a bad way to learn stuff too!

I've also found that static timing usually requires more up-front time and
fingering their Gantt chart. They usually quiet down when we get into
the lab and have a first-time 'go'. ;-)

$0.02 - Craig Gary Spivey wrote: > Actually, let me follow up my question with a more open ended question to > the group - Who out there does do back annotation of timing into the > simulator? How often? Do most people attempt to find these problems with > some sort of on chip debugging practice? Or do most FPGA designers rely on > some form of back annotation? > > How accurate are the static timing analyzers? In a perfect ASIC world, a > designer would use functional verification, static timing analysis, and then > do formal verification to verify the pre and post sysnthesis netlists match > (actually, I assume that some shops actually do this :-). The whole goal of > all of this was to get rid of the backannotated timing simulation. In the > FPGA, it seems to me that the formal verification is done by programming and > running the chip. > > Any thoughts? > > Cheers, > Gary Spivey > spivey@rincon.com  Article: 20582 Subject: Xilinx - implementing macros From: gazit@my-deja.com Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 15:20:34 GMT Links: << >> << T >> << A >>  Hi all, I have a piece of design (Verilog module) that appears many times in my project. To improve the overall density I want to convert it into an area optimized macro. Is there a simple (automatic) way to insert "macro external pins" instead of IOBs in the FPGA Editor ? My synthesizer (Synplify) supports "compile whiteout I/O insertion" but how will know where to connect the "macro external pins". Thanks, ----------------------------------------------- Rotem Gazit mailto:Xrotemg@mysticom.com (remove the X to send me mail.) MystiCom LTD. http://www.mysticom.com ----------------------------------------------- Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.  Article: 20583 Subject: Re: Advice please From: PaulTB <idezillaNOidSPAM@yahoo.com.invalid> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 07:57:22 -0800 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> I use Lattice Synario exclusively. It has VHDL and Verilog and Schematic capture. I use the schematic capture package and have produced several products with it. Paul idezilla@yahoo.com * 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: 20584 Subject: 100% slice utilization in Virtex FPGA From: Matt Gavin <mtgavin@collins.rockwell.com> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 10:03:34 -0600 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> FPGA gurus, I am trying to fit a design in a Virtex XCV300 (2.5V part). The Xilinx mapper reports 100% slice utilization, which shocked me. However, if you do the math on their flop and LUT counts, (assuming 2 flops and LUTs per slice), the flop and LUT utilizations are 55% and 76%, repectively, which is what I expected. The equivalent gate count is ~60K, which isn't that high (especially since Xilinx claims that 322K system gates can fit in a XCV300.) Should I be worried that my slice utilization is 100%? Why would the mapper choose to use every single slice if the flop and LUT counts are so low? The report is given below for reference. Thanks for any help, Matt Gavin mtgavin@collins.rockwell.com Design Information ------------------ Command Line : map -p xcv300-5-pq240 -o map.ncd mimas_fpga.ngd mimas_fpga.pcf Target Device : xv300 Target Package : pq240 Target Speed : -5 Mapper Version : virtex -- C.19 Mapped Date : Mon Feb 14 17:08:18 2000 Design Summary -------------- Number of errors: 0 Number of warnings: 4 Number of Slices: 3,072 out of 3,072 100% Slice Flip Flops: 3,408 4 input LUTs: 4,682 (4 used as a route-thru) Number of Slices containing unrelated logic: 948 out of 3,072 30% Number of bonded IOBs: 120 out of 166 72% Number of GCLKs: 4 out of 4 100% Number of GCLKIOBs: 3 out of 4 75% Total equivalent gate count for design: 60,367 Additional JTAG gate count for IOBs: 5,904  Article: 20585 Subject: Re: Xilinx Virtex Reset From: Magnus Homann <d0asta@licia.dtek.chalmers.se> Date: 15 Feb 2000 17:04:04 +0100 Links: << >> << T >> << A >> murray@pa.dec.com (Hal Murray) writes: > In article <38A8959D.66710000@ids.net>, > Ray Andraka <randraka@ids.net> writes: > > It's only free if it meets timing. I think you'll find that you are past it at > > 74MHz. Even in the 4K parts, GSR was only good up to a fraction of the clock > > rate the part can easily achieve with careful design. Also, the GSR hits every > > single flip-flop in the design, which in some cases can cause you grief > > (especially when you consider the need to resync the reset). > > Suggestion to vendors: > > Please sdd that timing spec to your data sheets. Yes! And please make your tools calculate the reset timing! Homann -- Magnus Homann, M.Sc. CS & E d0asta@dtek.chalmers.se  Article: 20586 Subject: Using SRL16 for synching asynch inputs? From: Magnus Homann <d0asta@licia.dtek.chalmers.se> Date: 15 Feb 2000 17:09:07 +0100 Links: << >> << T >> << A >>  Hello! What about using the SRL16 component in a Virtex for synching asynch inputs? Good metastability properties? Homann -- Magnus Homann, M.Sc. CS & E d0asta@dtek.chalmers.se  Article: 20587 Subject: Re: Altera vs Cypress? From: charles_elias@my-deja.com Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 16:14:58 GMT Links: << >> << T >> << A >> In article <38A2E5B2.2136@worldnet.att.net>, Mary Frantz <maryfrantz@worldnet.att.net> wrote: > We have been using Lattice CPLD's (ispLSI1024, ispLSI2064, etc.) in the > past with Synopsis software and are dissatisfied with the performance of > both. Our designs are generally quite simple (glue logic and > registers). Does anyone have a recommendation either for or against > Altera (MAX7000 family) using MAXBaseline or MAXPlus, and Cypress (Ultra > 37000 family) using Warp 5.2? Any known hardware or software prolems? > > Thanks in advance. > Mary Frantz > Mary, I have been using Cypress CPLDs and Warp for several years now. Lately I have been using the Ultra 37000 series exclusively. I have run across a few Warp bugs, but Cypress responded quickly to my e-mail concerning these with a work-around and/or a fix. I am very satisfied with the device performance and with Warp. At about$100 Warp is an
excellent value.

Charles

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

Article: 20588
Subject: Re: Is EDIF format adopted by all FPGA manufacturers???
From: "George" <g_roberts75@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 16:32:28 -0000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Yes, as far as I know all FPGA vendors PAR tools accept EDIF 2.0.0.


Article: 20589
Subject: Re: clock
From: "Andy Peters" <apeters.Nospam@nospam.noao.edu.nospam>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 09:46:20 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Benoît HAMON wrote in message <88b6gj$du$1@news.entreprises.cegetel.fr>...
>Hi,
>
>I'm trying to implemente (with "FOUNDATION implementation" in a Xilinx
>CPLD9500) a function in order to delay an output from an input ?.
>
>ex : clk_out <= clk_in after 10ns.
>I found many VHDL example in Web, but never implemented.

Well, the construct 'after 10 ns' is ignored for synthesis.  RTFM.  It's
there.

>NB: my aim is to create a Clock multiplier  : 13MHz => 26MHz.
>Can someone please give me an example IMPLEMENTED ?.

Inside an XC9500 part? You can't do it.  Period.

Thank you, drive through.

-- 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: 20590
Subject: Re: Virtex DLL inoperability
From: david gilchrist <david.gilchrist@NOSPAM.ccom>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 17:01:46 +0000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Steve Diferdinando wrote:
>
> Has anyone had trouble with the Virtex DLLs locking? If so, were you
> able to find a workaround?
>
> Steve D.

I have recently experienced some problem with DLLs locking on a
development board from VCC.  The output clock appears to be very jittery
and when I've attempted to double up the clock (using the CLK2X
output).  The code was lifted straight from the Xilinx web site and
looks fine when synthesised and put through P&R.  The output clock also
looks like it has a 1:4 mark space ratio which suggests it hasn't
locked.  I have also tried delaying the configuration until the DLL is
locked and the configuration does take longer but the end result is
identical.

I am at a bit of a loss for what to try next.

Any suggestions?

Cheers

DG

Article: 20591
Subject: Re: Master/Serial mode for Virtex
From: Mike Peattie <mpeattie@xilinx.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 09:24:27 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Definitely a good primer on FPGA configuration.  Allow me to pick a few nits
below:

Rickman wrote:

> The PRGM- signal normally is tied together on all of the FPGAs,
> regardless of the mode you are using to configure them. The main reason
> you would want to make these separate signals is if you want to be able
> start
> the configuration process when asserted low. The INIT- signal (which
> should be wired together from all FPGAs if using a daisychain config) is
> pulled low by the FPGAs. When PRGM- released high, the FPGAs run through
> at least one more
> config reset cycle and then release INIT-. Because INIT- is open
> collector,
> all chips have to release INIT- for it to go high. If you are
> configuring the FPGAs with separate data and clocks, then the INIT-
> signals can also be separate.
>
> Once INIT- is high, you can start clocking the data out. The CCLK should
> not be clocked by a free running clock. The clock edges are counted by
> the FPGA and
> must match the count contained within the bit file.
>

This is true for the 3000 and 4000 families only.  Virtex (and Spartan-II)
do not use a LengthCount, so a free running CCLK is just fine.

>
> There are a lot of details associated with clocking the data. You have
> to supply the right number of clocks without no clocks coming before the
> beginning of the data. Further, you will have to provide some number of
> extra clocks at the end with the data high. This number depends on how
> the bit file
> is specified for the synchonization of the DONE, the internal GSR being
> released, the release of the IO tristate control and the end of the data
> configuration. This is all specified to
> the program that builds the bit file. It is a bit complex. I always use
> the default which I believe uses three extra clocks. I think you can add
> some extra clocks beyond the ones required at the end without hurting
> anything.
>

Absolutely true.
I encourage anyone who feels the documentation is misleading or confusing
in any way to open a case with the hotline.  These app notes are written to
explain these concepts without confusion, and can certainly be updated and
changed.

Mike


Article: 20592
Subject: Re: Multiple GND & VCC Instances
From: Greg Neff <gregneff@my-deja.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 17:31:33 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In article <888t7k$du$1@seagoon.newcastle.edu.au>,
mwojko@collpits.newcastle.edu.au (Mathew Wojko) wrote:
> Hi,
>
>    Currently I'm migrating/implementing schematic entered designs I
> created for the Xilinx XC4000 series. I'm now implementing these on
Virtex
> devices. However, I'm facing a problem with VCC & GND nets.
>
>    My designs are heirachical and most sheets contain instances of
VCC & GND
> components. However, when I map these designs to the Virtex
architecture
> (using Foundation v1.5) I'm getting extremely high CLB slice
requirements
> due to extensive instances of VCC and GND. It appears that for each
sheet
> containing a VCC or GND component, when the sheet (or macro created
from
> it) is implemented, the VCC and GND components are implemented
exclusively
> to the particular instance of the sheet.
>
>    On viewing the design imlementation using EPIC, it is evident that
many
> CLB slices are used exclusively to output a logic '0' or '1' for GND
or
> VCC respectively.
>
>    My question is why is it doing this? When previously using
Foundation
> v1.4 to implement the same designs on the XC4000 series, I did not
come
> across this problem. As you could guess, I anticipated similar CLB
counts
> for implementing the designs on the Virtex architecture, but was
> considerably shocked to view the difference in cell counts.
>
>    Is there any way that I can consolidate the VCC and GND nets to
reduce
> the CLB count? I am aware that if I do this, I may encounter a
considerably
> longer PWR/GND routing delay. But I am willing to make this tradeoff.
> I've searched through DejaNews and queried Xilinx support (with no
response)
> but have not yet found any answers.
>
>    Can anyone provide any suggestion here?
>
>
>    Mathew.
>

Try this: On one sheet of the design place a single instance of the GND
component, connect it to a hanging net, and label the net GND.
Wherever you need a ground connection on an input, connect the input to
a hanging net labeled GND.  Do the same thing for VCC.

--
Greg Neff
VP Engineering
*Microsym* Computers Inc.
greg@guesswhichwordgoeshere.com

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

Article: 20593
Subject: Re: Virtex DLL inoperability
From: Simon Goble <simon_g@q_pict.com>
Date: 15 Feb 2000 13:16:50 EST
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
This reminds me of a problem I had with an XCV300 DLL which would lock
OK when fed a clock from a PLL chip -but not from an XTAL!

The Zen 'fix' was to reduce the signal level from the 5V XTAL with a
couple of resistors -it took me a while to find it too..

(Also make sure the input frequency is within range for the DLL)

Hope this works for you..

++Simon

On Tue, 15 Feb 2000 17:01:46 +0000, david gilchrist
<david.gilchrist@NOSPAM.ccom> wrote:

>Steve Diferdinando wrote:
>>
>> Has anyone had trouble with the Virtex DLLs locking? If so, were you
>> able to find a workaround?
>>
>> Steve D.
>
>I have recently experienced some problem with DLLs locking on a
>development board from VCC.  The output clock appears to be very jittery
>and when I've attempted to double up the clock (using the CLK2X
>output).  The code was lifted straight from the Xilinx web site and
>looks fine when synthesised and put through P&R.  The output clock also
>looks like it has a 1:4 mark space ratio which suggests it hasn't
>locked.  I have also tried delaying the configuration until the DLL is
>locked and the configuration does take longer but the end result is
>identical.
>
>I am at a bit of a loss for what to try next.
>
>Any suggestions?
>
>Cheers
>
>DG


Article: 20594
Subject: Product Validation Engineers Needed!
From: "TalentLab" <star@talentlab.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:30:16 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Assignment 438

PRODUCT VALIDATION ENG.

Desired experience(in years):3  Ottawa, ON &
Vancouver BC

Your role will be to develop functional test plans
and
validation boards for the in-depth
validation of our ASSPs. As well, you will
participate
in all phases of the development
process from board definition through testing;
design
circuit boards at the analog and
digital level; design FPGAs; develop test
methodologies
for thorough test and evaluation
of our ASSPs; and provide reference designs to
Customer Support groups.

Energetic, intelligent and detail-oriented, you
understand that you're the last "gate"
before products are shipped to the customer and take
pride in finding and solving
technical problems. You possess a BSEE or equivalent
with 3 years' applicable
experience in complex board design. Proficient in
analog, digital designs, FPGA,
generating scrips, you are ideally familiar with C
and
have knowledge of ATM, Sonet and
frame relay.

TWO POSITIONS AVAILABLE-OTTAWA ON & VANCOUVER BC

Strong or Expert
Technical Skills:ASSP,FPGA,C
Technical Skills:ATM,SONET,FRAMERELAY


Article: 20595
Subject: coregen-bug produces bad blockram > 16 bit
From: "Mark Hillers" <Mark.Hillers@Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 19:03:44 +0000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello,

i think i have found a bug in xilinx-tool coregen 2.1i.
it happens when creating single-port-blockrams with words larger than 16
bit.

the resulting ".edn"-file (for synopsys) uses one RAMB4_S16_S16
component where the
lower 16 bit of the 24-bit-word are mapped to port A (DOA[15:0]) and the
upper 8 bit are mapped to port B (DOA[15:8]).
But - and here comes the bug - the address of the desired word is simply
following way:

The problem is now that always both ports load the same address and with
it the same data. The Result is an output which has the form CDABCD
where A,B,C,D are hex-ciphers.

In application-note XAPP130 (V1.1) is a solution to this problem. The
mapping of the address-ports should be:

Now I am looking for a simple patch. The simples would be a new version
of coregen because i am not good in writing ".edn"-files :-(.

greetings
mark

Article: 20596
Subject: Virtex size: Row,Col or Col,Row ?
From: husby@fnal.gov (Don Husby)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 19:20:12 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
When the data sheet lists the XCV600E as having an array size of 48x72,
is that 48 rows or 48 columns?

--
Don Husby <husby@fnal.gov>             http://www-ese.fnal.gov/people/husby
Fermi National Accelerator Lab                          Phone: 630-840-3668
Batavia, IL 60510                                         Fax: 630-840-5406

Article: 20597
Subject: Simulating Virtex
From: "Matt Billenstein" <mbillens@one.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 15:52:53 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
All,

I'm starting to write a VHDL testbench for my VHDL Virtex design.  I'm using
Orcad release 9.1, but there aren't any Virtex primitive libraries...   How
are you all simulating the timing of your Virtex designs?  Which tools?
I've barely look at the Foundation simulator, but I've heard it's not good?

thx

m


Article: 20598
Subject: Re: Virtex size: Row,Col or Col,Row ?
From: Peter Alfke <peter@xilinx.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:08:30 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
The smaller number describes the rows, the larger one the columns.
Peter Alfke

Don Husby wrote:

> When the data sheet lists the XCV600E as having an array size of 48x72,
> is that 48 rows or 48 columns?
>
> --
> Don Husby <husby@fnal.gov>             http://www-ese.fnal.gov/people/husby
> Fermi National Accelerator Lab                          Phone: 630-840-3668
> Batavia, IL 60510                                         Fax: 630-840-5406


Article: 20599
Subject: The definitive site for ASIC jobs!
From: karthikeyan@my-deja.com
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 22:15:25 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Dear Job Seeker,

We invite you to try our new jobsite Asicsearch.com
(http://www.asicsearch.com) created exclusively for professionals in
the semi-conductor (ASIC/EDA) industry by industry insiders.
This focus draws to our site some of the top recruiters in the industry
looking for ASIC/EDA professionals to fill their open positions. So you
wont have to sift through dozens of job site looking for that
one “right” opening. asicsearch.com  puts you in control of the job
search process.

## Customized information on your “My Profile” page keeps you up to
date.
## Unique User-Defined confidentiality options lets you decide how and
when a recruiter can see you profile, while allowing you to see the
jobs matching your profile at all times.
## Our advanced search & match system enables employers/recruiters to
find you faster.
## You dont have to spend time searching for job openings, they are
automatically delivered to your “My Profile” page.
## You can maintain your profile indefnitely on asicsearch.com and
customize your profile as you please. So you can be a passive job
seeker and still find interesting openings.

Visit asicsearch.com today and take the time to post your resume. Take
advantage of faster job matches, confidential resume option and
customized “My Profile” information  page. Get an edge on the
competition with Asicsearch.com’s advanced SMS (search & match system)

What are you waiting for? Check us out  by logging in at:
http://www.asicsearch.com

Best Regards,

support@asicsearch.com

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/