Unified FPGA Development Suite
in [Design]
|
Prev: my lab
Next: Beta sucked?
From: Jon Slaughter on 11 Oct 2009 04:49 http://electrosofts.com/systemC/index.html Gives a good explanation of it. It seems that it can actually be used with any compiler as it is a class library entirely built from C++. Although at some stage in the linking/assembling process one must convert the code to something else which would require special software.
From: David L. Jones on 11 Oct 2009 07:34 krw wrote: > On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 12:57:04 +1100, "David L. Jones" > <altzone(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> 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, > > What does a C/++ compiler do? FPGAs are concurrent devices so a > concurrent language is needed. It's for a soft core processor of course. A lot of FPGA designs these days will have a soft core processor in them, so it's a very common requirement. Altium comes with several soft cores for free. >> GUI like OpenBus, > > Everyone has a GUI. The whole purpose of a GUI is to make driving the > software simple(r). No, this is different. OpenBus is a propreity Altium thing that allows you to design an FPGA project in a visul "flow chart" type manner. i.e. drop a processor into your system and then connect external memory and periphers etc. You won't need any VHDL or other HDL code to get your project working if all the building blocks you want are in the Altium library. It almost certainly the easiest way possible to get an FPGA project up and running. It's not for everyone, but it is very simple. >> Real-time OS, and a C to Hardware compiler > > Oh, *that's* going to work. See above. Yes, it actually works. See above. >> 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. > > I thought you said the tools were $4K/yr. That is a big difference. No, an NB3000 development board with a 12month licence with everything you need to do FPGA/C/C++/C-Hardware/soft core etc is only $399. If you want the software outright it's only $995. You get everything except the PCB stuff. It's only $4K if you want the full package with PCB design outright. Dave. -- --------------------------------------------- Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast: http://www.eevblog.com
From: Charlie E. on 11 Oct 2009 10:25 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. > > ...Jim Thompson Boy, Jim, you got me thinking... I didn't get to work with it as much as I wanted, but did you have a full 8.0 Designlab license? Or just PSpice. Desinglab actually did have a full digital logic design system in there, but I didn't get to use it enough to really know its capabilities. It had licensed the digital design stuff from someone else, and was designed to either do Xinlinx FPGAs or CPLDs from several manufacturers. I think, though, that it was mainly just a logic reduction system, and didn't do anything special for state machines. Charlie
From: krw on 11 Oct 2009 11:32 On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:34:39 +1100, "David L. Jones" <altzone(a)gmail.com> wrote: >krw wrote: >> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 12:57:04 +1100, "David L. Jones" >> <altzone(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> 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, >> >> What does a C/++ compiler do? FPGAs are concurrent devices so a >> concurrent language is needed. > >It's for a soft core processor of course. A lot of FPGA designs these days >will have a soft core processor in them, so it's a very common requirement. >Altium comes with several soft cores for free. Ok, then is no different than any other *free* development system from the chip manufacturers. Slaughter was suggesting that it was the FPGA fabric development tool. >>> GUI like OpenBus, >> >> Everyone has a GUI. The whole purpose of a GUI is to make driving the >> software simple(r). > >No, this is different. OpenBus is a propreity Altium thing that allows you >to design an FPGA project in a visul "flow chart" type manner. i.e. drop a >processor into your system and then connect external memory and periphers >etc. You won't need any VHDL or other HDL code to get your project working >if all the building blocks you want are in the Altium library. >It almost certainly the easiest way possible to get an FPGA project up and >running. It's not for everyone, but it is very simple. Proprietary is enough to kill the deal. That's a major advantage of HDLs; all you need is a text editor and you're good to go. Indeed that's the one reason I won't use schematic entry for the data flow. Data flow is extremely tedious in HDL but locking it into a tool defeats a major purpose of HDLs. >>> Real-time OS, and a C to Hardware compiler >> >> Oh, *that's* going to work. See above. > >Yes, it actually works. See above. SystemC, perhaps. If the love is so great for C why not Verilog. It's almost as ugly as C. >>> 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. >> >> I thought you said the tools were $4K/yr. That is a big difference. > >No, an NB3000 development board with a 12month licence with everything you >need to do FPGA/C/C++/C-Hardware/soft core etc is only $399. If you want the >software outright it's only $995. You get everything except the PCB stuff. >It's only $4K if you want the full package with PCB design outright. I misunderstood earlier. I was looking to switch schematic capture tools a few weeks ago but we're pretty much locked into Allegro. I'm pretty much stuck with Crapture. No point in going there, then.
From: MooseFET on 11 Oct 2009 12:59
On Oct 10, 6:50 pm, "David L. Jones" <altz...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Jon Slaughter wrote: > > "Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaugh...(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 $399http://www.newark.com/altium/12-400-nb3000xn-01/nanoboard-3000xn-xili... > > 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 If your software can output a *.JAM file, you can make your own JTAG cable for way under $150. Altera published the code for a JAM/STAPL player some years back. I have a hacked version that I use all the time. The very nice thing about it is that it can be made simple enough that you can write the instructions for using it on a single page. |