Prev: Comunicate FPGA to Ethernet
Next: (Xilinx) OPB watchdog timer fails to release RESET
From: InmateRemo on 20 Mar 2007 17:15
I've played around with Xilinx PicoBlaze processor, but it's time to step up
into 32-bit softcore CPU world for more serious designs, potentially getting
in line with embedded OS.



I am facing a choice, whether to use always up to date Xilinx EDK tools
integrated with ISE and MicroBlaze, which comes with good documentation,
there is a third party uClinux port.

The other alternative is using Altium Designer FPGA goodies bag. They offer
a wide range of Wishbone compatible cores (no source code though), platform
independent primitive libraries, a choice of few softcore processors
including 32-bit RISC core TSK3000, and even support for the same
MicroBlaze, but I've noticed that supported version is a bit behind.



Currently I am considering Altium route as it brings more value to the
table, providing vendor independence, but at the same time I would entirely
depend on Altium continuous support towards FPGAs.



I would appreciate if anybody could share a similar experience or thoughts.




From: Austin Lesea on 20 Mar 2007 17:33
InmateRemo,

Thoughts to share:

I would suggest that Xilinx is the only provider with a continuous
history of providing a code compatible (MicroBlaze) soft processor.

Where others had their first version (which did not work very well) and
then abandoned it (leaving all their customers with useless code).
Xilinx recognizes that to be a serious player in the embedded processor
space there must be backward compatible code (forever). Intel's rule is
very simple, you can research and play with any architecture you wish,
but there is one, and only one instruction set (x86).

In a similar fashion, we have PicoBlaze (still the KCMP core from long
ago), MicroBlaze (32 bit Harvard architecture soft core optimized for
our architecture -- unchanged as far as instructions from day 1), and
the IBM Power PC family (405, 4??, ???: the roadmap being IBM's "power"
architecture roadmap, just delayed).

With as many customers as we have, with all of their designs, and as
many seats of software (more than 250,000 installed), and our long
history (invented the FPGA in 1984), besides our business position (took
PowerPC(tm IBM) architecture from ~33% in embedded systems when we
introduced Virtex II Pro, to more than 50% of embedded systems today);
you would be well served to stick with Xilinx.

Austin
From: G�ran Bilski on 20 Mar 2007 18:27
Hi,

It would depend if you want to use MicroBlaze or not and how important new
feature of MicroBlaze will be.

Altium is also a nice tool and you should compare the it with Xilinx tools
to see which one provides best features for your need.
But Xilinx tools will be the tool with best support for MicroBlaze and all
it's new features.

Being vendor independent is nice but it's also comes with a cost of
performance and cost.

Good luck in your decision

G�ran

"InmateRemo" <remis4pro(a)yahoo.com.extra> wrote in message
news:iaYLh.18079$MR6.3246(a)fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> I've played around with Xilinx PicoBlaze processor, but it's time to step
> up into 32-bit softcore CPU world for more serious designs, potentially
> getting in line with embedded OS.
>
>
>
> I am facing a choice, whether to use always up to date Xilinx EDK tools
> integrated with ISE and MicroBlaze, which comes with good documentation,
> there is a third party uClinux port.
>
> The other alternative is using Altium Designer FPGA goodies bag. They
> offer a wide range of Wishbone compatible cores (no source code though),
> platform independent primitive libraries, a choice of few softcore
> processors including 32-bit RISC core TSK3000, and even support for the
> same MicroBlaze, but I've noticed that supported version is a bit behind.
>
>
>
> Currently I am considering Altium route as it brings more value to the
> table, providing vendor independence, but at the same time I would
> entirely depend on Altium continuous support towards FPGAs.
>
>
>
> I would appreciate if anybody could share a similar experience or
> thoughts.
>
>
>
>


From: Jim Granville on 20 Mar 2007 19:24
InmateRemo wrote:
> I've played around with Xilinx PicoBlaze processor, but it's time to step up
> into 32-bit softcore CPU world for more serious designs, potentially getting
> in line with embedded OS.
>
>
>
> I am facing a choice, whether to use always up to date Xilinx EDK tools
> integrated with ISE and MicroBlaze, which comes with good documentation,
> there is a third party uClinux port.
>
> The other alternative is using Altium Designer FPGA goodies bag. They offer
> a wide range of Wishbone compatible cores (no source code though), platform
> independent primitive libraries, a choice of few softcore processors
> including 32-bit RISC core TSK3000, and even support for the same
> MicroBlaze, but I've noticed that supported version is a bit behind.
>
>
>
> Currently I am considering Altium route as it brings more value to the
> table, providing vendor independence, but at the same time I would entirely
> depend on Altium continuous support towards FPGAs.
>
>
>
> I would appreciate if anybody could share a similar experience or thoughts.

Aren't these two mutually exclusive ?!
"(no source code though)"
and
"providing vendor independence"

ie, with no source code, you have just locked yourself into vendor
Altium - surely a crazy thing to do ?

If you like vendor independance, then look at Lattice Mico8/Mico32,
which are open source.

-jg

From: RemisN on 21 Mar 2007 08:15
On Mar 20, 11:24 pm, Jim Granville <no.s...(a)designtools.maps.co.nz>
wrote:
> InmateRemo wrote:
> > I've played around with Xilinx PicoBlaze processor, but it's time to step up
> > into 32-bit softcore CPU world for more serious designs, potentially getting
> > in line with embedded OS.
>
> > I am facing a choice, whether to use always up to date Xilinx EDK tools
> > integrated with ISE and MicroBlaze, which comes with good documentation,
> > there is a third party uClinux port.
>
> > The other alternative is using Altium Designer FPGA goodies bag. They offer
> > a wide range of Wishbone compatible cores (no source code though), platform
> > independent primitive libraries, a choice of few softcore processors
> > including 32-bit RISC core TSK3000, and even support for the same
> > MicroBlaze, but I've noticed that supported version is a bit behind.
>
> > Currently I am considering Altium route as it brings more value to the
> > table, providing vendor independence, but at the same time I would entirely
> > depend on Altium continuous support towards FPGAs.
>
> > I would appreciate if anybody could share a similar experience or thoughts.
>
> Aren't these two mutually exclusive ?!
> "(no source code though)"
> and
> "providing vendor independence"
>
> ie, with no source code, you have just locked yourself into vendor
> Altium - surely a crazy thing to do ?
>
> If you like vendor independance, then look at Lattice Mico8/Mico32,
> which are open source.
>
> -jg

Yes Lattice Mico8/Mico32 are open source, but can you really use them
anywhere else except only with Lattice ISP Lever and Lattice FPGA
devices???

Yes, seems like Atlium has invested heavily into FPGAs, leading EDA
industry with seamless integration, and having schematics, layout,
FPGA code as well as C/C++ code for softcore CPU all integrated into
single environment does bring benefits to the design team. And I am
sure Altium will support this vision as long as it brings cash on the
table.

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Comunicate FPGA to Ethernet
Next: (Xilinx) OPB watchdog timer fails to release RESET