Unified FPGA Development Suite
in [Design]
|
Prev: my lab
Next: Beta sucked?
From: krw on 10 Oct 2009 21:50 On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:55:24 -0700, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:33:39 -0500, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > >>On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:20:01 -0700, Jim Thompson >><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 16:59:31 -0500, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >>> >>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:55:34 -0700, Jim Thompson >>>><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >>>> >>>[snip] >>>>> >>>>>Clearly I'm not a digital guy... at least beyond pure combinational >>>>>reduction, which I actually used to teach about 40 years ago. >>>> >>>>No one does logic reduction anymore, if they ever did. Gates are >>>>free. ;-) >>>> >>>>>What I'd like is some tool that took in a truth table, each line >>>>>representing states at that clock tick, spitting out gates, flops, >>>>>etc., to implement that ;-) >>>> >>>>That's easy. Put the table in a ROM and put a counter at the input. >>>>If you really want to get fancy, put a register at the output. ;-) >>>> >>>[snip] >>> >>>What I do now (when I don't hand-off the trouble to a buddy) is do >>>exactly that, counter, plus addressing. >>> >>>So-so for simple stuff. Isn't there a better way? I'm not doing >>>FPGA... I'm doing "gates-on-demand" ;-) >> >>The problem with classical minimization is that it requires only a >>single output. If there is more than one output needed minimization >>becomes an oxymoron. The question becomes *what* do you want to >>minimize; gates? delay? skew? power?... Add in library gates more >>complex than 2I and things get difficult fast. Just the thing for >>computers to do. ;-) ...and they don't bother with classical >>minimization either. >> >>Back to your question: I have used synthesis tools that will give a >>"gate view" or "technology view", but they have to be set up for the >>gate library you're using. The ones I used were specifically for >>FPGAs but the "gate view" might be useful for you, though the input is >>still HDL. Answer: no, I don't know of a cheap way of putting me out >>of work. ;-) > >The process I'm presently designing on (X-FAB XB-06) does have a >pre-defined digital library of gates and flops. Ask them for synthesis tools. See what they come up with.
From: krw on 10 Oct 2009 21:55 On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:28:55 -0700, Peter Bennett <peterbb(a)somewhere.invalid> wrote: >On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:08:11 -0500, "Jon Slaughter" ><Jon_Slaughter(a)Hotmail.com> wrote: > >>The problem I have is that I brought a few proASIC3's a while ago and I >>would like to use them. Unfortunately the libero IDE just crashes on my >>system. I can't even get it to a splash screen(which I imagine there is >>one). There support is of no help as they just say "Reinstall"(whcih I've >>done for various versions). >> >>Now, it does run under vista in my dual boot configuration but I have all my >>tools in XP and never use vista. >> >>Hence, I would like to be able to develop and debug fgpa code in a working >>environment under XP. I can then hop over to vista and "compile" the stuff >>in libero when I need the specific device code. >> >>I know there are tools that do what I want. I think FPGA Advantage does >>it... or did it. A book called fpga warrior mentions some linux tools(I >>have). >> >>Basically I just need something to get started writing some code so I can >>get my head wrapped around how it all works(I have an idea but I need to get >>some experience). I prefer to work in a C++ like language since I'm more >>familiar with it and oop is more powerful for complex designs. I think linux >>has a SystemC compiler. I do have Cygwin installed so might be able to use >>some of the tools there. > >I don't think C++ can be used to configure an FPGA. (I prefer the term >"configure", rather than "program" to describe what we do to an FPGA, >although I do use "program" to describe downloading the configuration >file to the FPGA.) > >FPGAs and CPLDs consist of a large number of gates, flip-flops and >other devices that the user can connect together as desires, to >perform some useful function. > >I've used Altera's Quartus program to generate configuration files for >their FPGAs and CPLDs. Quartus allows me to design the circuit either >by drawing schematic diagrams using gates, flip-flops, and other logic >elements, or by using a Hardware Description Language (AHDL or VHDL) >to describe the required logic in a text file (or to use both >schematic and AHDL in the same project.) > >It is possible to include a processor in the FPGA configuration - then >that processor could be programmed, like any other processor, using C >or C++ (if you can find a suitable cross-compiler.) However, the FPGA >configuration and processor program development are two separate >steps. Sometimes not so separate if you use internal memory for the processor program. The project I contracted on last year (a high-end video camera) use a Virtex-4 with an embedded PowerPC (hard processor). The PPC code was contained in the Virtex BlockRams configured as single-port ROMs. The processor program was loaded at FPGA configuration. ;-)
From: David L. Jones on 10 Oct 2009 21:57 krw wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 11:18:48 -0700, Charlie E. <edmondson(a)ieee.org> > wrote: > >> On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:18:47 -0500, "Jon Slaughter" >> <Jon_Slaughter(a)Hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Is there a development suite that is good but can target multiple >>> fpga manufactures? I don't really want to install a bunch of 1GB+ >>> light versions for each manufacture just to see which one is best. >>> In fact I can't even get libero to run because it crashes on >>> startup. >>> >>> Also, know of any links for DIY fpga programmers? How hard is it to >>> program? I figured that one just has to feed a bitstream into the >>> fpga similar to how a pic is programmed(or most devices actually). >>> Looking at the proASIC's makes me think it's a bit different but I >>> haven't found any conclusive way to program them except by using >>> DirectC or the STAPL Player. Since I'm experimenting with these >>> different manufactures I don't want to have to buy a programmer for >>> each chip. For as much as they cost I could get nanoboard with >>> 10^10x the functionality. >>> >> Jon, >> Ok, thought about this a bit. Part of the problem is that the EDA >> companies basically just provide a front end for the FPGA company's >> tools. They don't try and duplicate that back end effort, it isn't >> worth it for them. So, if you want to do more than just preliminary >> designs for each vendor, you will still have to install X number of >> starter editions for each vendor you want to try. > > Pretty much, but a lot of the design can be done on any one of the > vendor's tools then the design ported to the others. Of course this > presumes that you don't instantiate any primitives or use exclusive > features. > >> For the price, Altium at $3999 is probably the cheapest major >> company. When paired with their nanoboards, you can get a decent >> development platform to really try things out. Their latest >> nanoboard is only $399 and comes with a years subscription to the >> front end software. > > WHy spend the money. $4K is still a lot when the manufacturer's give > the stuff away. They're quite eager for business now too. ;-) I > Bought one of Altera's Cyclone-III (Arrow's, actually) development > boards for $200. There are even cheaper development boards out there. > Actel forgot to take their back. ;-) > >> There may be other small players, like Proteus, but I am unfamiliar >> with the tools. > > If all they're offering is the front end, why bother unless the > manufacturer's free tools don't work (high end chips or *really* tight > designs)? Altium's "front end" includes C and C++ compilers, GUI like OpenBus, Real-time OS, and a C to Hardware compiler along with the usual Schematic/VHDL/Verilog, all in a pretty easy to use environment. Plus you get 32bit processors and other IP. No restrictions. You get all that for 12months plus a development board all for $399. Dave. -- --------------------------------------------- Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast: http://www.eevblog.com
From: Jon Slaughter on 10 Oct 2009 22:03 "David L. Jones" <altzone(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:jRaAm.226299$sC1.165834(a)newsfe17.iad... > Jon Slaughter wrote: >> "Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaughter(a)Hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:haoqug$35j$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>> Is there a development suite that is good but can target multiple >>> fpga manufactures? I don't really want to install a bunch of 1GB+ >>> light versions >>> for each manufacture just to see which one is best. In fact I can't >>> even get >>> libero to run because it crashes on startup. >>> >>> Also, know of any links for DIY fpga programmers? How hard is it to >>> program? I figured that one just has to feed a bitstream into the >>> fpga similar to how a pic is programmed(or most devices actually). >>> Looking at the proASIC's makes me think it's a bit different but I >>> haven't found any conclusive way to program them except by using >>> DirectC or the STAPL Player. >>> Since I'm experimenting with these different manufactures I don't >>> want to have to buy a programmer for each chip. For as much as they >>> cost I could get >>> nanoboard with 10^10x the functionality. >> >> BTW, I forgot to mention that I want to program in C++. Pure C++ but >> SystemC or similar if necessary. > > Altium have a Xilinx (others on the way) development board and 12 month > license of their full soft package for $399 > http://www.newark.com/altium/12-400-nb3000xn-01/nanoboard-3000xn-xilinx-spartan/dp/10R0248 > > For that you get C and C++, VHDL/Verilog, GUI like OpenBus, Real-time OS, > and/or C to Hardware compiler for your development. Plus 32bit processors > and other IP. No restrictions. > > Altium uses the Xilinx (or other) tools as the back-end, but it's all > seamless, you don't notice you are using them. > > If you do want to experiment with different manufactuers, the Nanoboard > NB2 is better, but it's $2K. > > They have a JTAG programmer for $150 for use on your own custom boards: > http://www.newark.com/altium/12-403-dt01/usb-jtag-adapter/dp/10R0257 > > Dave. I can use that JTAG programmer for most of the common fpgas(actel, altera, xilinx, etc..) and develop the code for also in altium? Thing is, I don't see any reason to pay 150$ for a single family of fpgas when I can get that nanoboard that has a tone of stuff on it and probably end up using it to program my own fpga's anyways(eventuall). I did see some of the video's on the nanoboard and it looks pretty cool. Those jtag programmers are squat compared to what that nanoboard has on it. Hence, if I'm going to spend 150$ for a rinkydink programmer I might as well spend twice as much and get something I can program with and more.
From: Jon Slaughter on 10 Oct 2009 22:06
"Peter Bennett" <peterbb(a)somewhere.invalid> wrote in message news:alc2d51pkagq93o1spctm6toh592d3qh4c(a)news.supernews.com... > On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:08:11 -0500, "Jon Slaughter" > <Jon_Slaughter(a)Hotmail.com> wrote: > >>The problem I have is that I brought a few proASIC3's a while ago and I >>would like to use them. Unfortunately the libero IDE just crashes on my >>system. I can't even get it to a splash screen(which I imagine there is >>one). There support is of no help as they just say "Reinstall"(whcih I've >>done for various versions). >> >>Now, it does run under vista in my dual boot configuration but I have all >>my >>tools in XP and never use vista. >> >>Hence, I would like to be able to develop and debug fgpa code in a working >>environment under XP. I can then hop over to vista and "compile" the stuff >>in libero when I need the specific device code. >> >>I know there are tools that do what I want. I think FPGA Advantage does >>it... or did it. A book called fpga warrior mentions some linux tools(I >>have). >> >>Basically I just need something to get started writing some code so I can >>get my head wrapped around how it all works(I have an idea but I need to >>get >>some experience). I prefer to work in a C++ like language since I'm more >>familiar with it and oop is more powerful for complex designs. I think >>linux >>has a SystemC compiler. I do have Cygwin installed so might be able to use >>some of the tools there. > > I don't think C++ can be used to configure an FPGA. (I prefer the term > "configure", rather than "program" to describe what we do to an FPGA, > although I do use "program" to describe downloading the configuration > file to the FPGA.) > Well, if you are using the term "configure" for writing HDL code then they do have C++ style coding. SystemC is a C++ "configurer". Supposedly they have several others that are more "pure". > FPGAs and CPLDs consist of a large number of gates, flip-flops and > other devices that the user can connect together as desires, to > perform some useful function. > > I've used Altera's Quartus program to generate configuration files for > their FPGAs and CPLDs. Quartus allows me to design the circuit either > by drawing schematic diagrams using gates, flip-flops, and other logic > elements, or by using a Hardware Description Language (AHDL or VHDL) > to describe the required logic in a text file (or to use both > schematic and AHDL in the same project.) > > It is possible to include a processor in the FPGA configuration - then > that processor could be programmed, like any other processor, using C > or C++ (if you can find a suitable cross-compiler.) However, the FPGA > configuration and processor program development are two separate > steps. No, look up SystemC for C++ methods that are equivalent(in some regards) to HDL. It is supposedly much more powerful and faster when used in simulation. |