Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • 13:54
    Marek-ADT commented #862
  • 13:43
    Andy-Darlington commented #862
  • 13:06
    LarsAsplund commented #862
  • 10:24
    Marek-ADT commented #862
  • 10:19
    Marek-ADT commented #862
  • 10:18
    Marek-ADT commented #862
  • Jan 26 19:10
    vogma edited #894
  • Jan 26 19:08
    vogma edited #894
  • Jan 26 17:29
    vogma opened #894
  • Jan 25 21:18
    LarsAsplund commented #862
  • Jan 24 21:13

    eine on master

    readme: update shield syntax (b… (compare)

  • Jan 24 15:55
    LarsAsplund closed #893
  • Jan 23 17:13
    yurivict closed #886
  • Jan 23 17:13
    yurivict commented #886
  • Jan 23 13:59
    LarsAsplund commented #893
  • Jan 23 13:24
    RomoloMurri97 commented #893
  • Jan 23 13:05
    LarsAsplund commented #886
  • Jan 23 13:03
    LarsAsplund commented #893
  • Jan 23 11:15
    RomoloMurri97 commented #893
  • Jan 23 09:37
    RomoloMurri97 commented #893
eine
@eine
I think it is because <2008 versions of the standard. But I'm not sure.
Rafael Pereira
@rafaelnp
@eine Using pacman -S ghdl-mcode on Arch Linux and apt install ghdlon Ubuntu 19.10.
eine
@eine

@eine Using pacman -S ghdl-mcode on Arch Linux and apt install ghdlon Ubuntu 19.10.

And you get the same error when using VUnit in any of them?

GlenNicholls
@GlenNicholls

some years ago GHDL was distributed as a Debian package, but because it included non-free IEEE libs it was removed. Then, Tristan wrote openieee to allow a roughly functional package of GHDL + libs to be distributed through Debian repos. Now that IEEE libs are open source, openieee should not be required.

Ahhh okay, I see. Probably explains why I had so many difficulties with GHDL a few years ago when I first tried to use it. Thanks for the history!

Rafael Pereira
@rafaelnp
@eine My first message contained the error on Arch Linux, the one below is from Ubuntu, similar, but not the same:
=== Command output: ===
/usr/bin/ghdl-mcode:warning: library ieee does not exists for v08
/usr/local/lib/python3.7/dist-packages/vunit/vhdl/string_ops/src/string_ops.vhd:9:9: cannot find resource library "ieee"
/usr/local/lib/python3.7/dist-packages/vunit/vhdl/string_ops/src/string_ops.vhd:10:10: unit "std_logic_1164" not found in library "ieee"
Compile failed
eine
@eine
@rafaelnp are you trying to execute one of VUnit's examples? Or your own?
Bradley Harden
@bradleyharden
A colleague of mine is trying to use --export-json to get started with rust_hdl. I have done neither before, so I'm having trouble helping him. VUnit is choking on the vendor libraries. Their location is called out in the modelsim.ini file, and there are no complaints when simulating the design. But when he tried to --export-json, VUnit says it can't find the libraries.
Any thoughts? Is this a possible bug? Or is he not doing something right?
Wait, maybe that makes sense. There are no source files for the pre-compiled vendor libs, so it doesn't make sense for them to be included, right?
Rafael Pereira
@rafaelnp
@eine the examples from the user_guide.
@eine @GlenNicholls I was able to find the root cause, as pointed by @eine. I downloaded the ghdl source code, compiled and installed and added it to the $PATH, and now it works. I compared both package contents (Arch and Ubuntu) to the manually installed files, and there are binary (*.o) and VHDL files missing. Thanks for your help. :)
GlenNicholls
@GlenNicholls
@all does anyone have any public resources for combining multiple verification components in a single BFM? I have a large design I'm currently verifying and the testbench is getting pretty ugly with all of VC's and message passing. I've got AXI master/slaves, AXI stream, UART, AXI GPIO, and memory and I would like to package this in a single BFM to make it easier to maintain. Unfortunately, the component I'm working with will be used in an even larger design so I'm trying to find a reasonable way to put this in a single BFM such that it can be directly instantiated later without copying/pasting so much code. I checked tsfpga and it doesn't look like they have anything like this and searching GitHub isn't yielding anything.
NanooooK
@NanooooK
Is there a way from a VHDL testbench to retrieve the information provided by Python add_config? I'm looking to retrieve the name so I can pass it to the file_handler parameters. I've checked the documentation but the only information that I've found that could be extracted from the runner are output_path and tb_path
image.png
Lars Asplund
@LarsAsplund
@NanooooK No, you would have to input the configuration name as an extra generic.
NanooooK
@NanooooK
Ok, I'll do that then. Thanks
Yatekii
@Yatekii
@LarsAsplund well unfortunatley I think you can forget this ...
they had 12 years time to implement 2008 and it still is not
eine
@eine
@Yatekii, funnily enough, the features that are being requested are VHDL 1993 features, NOT VHDL 2008. They had 27 years to do it..
Still, praying is free (as in free beer).
T. Meissner
@tmeissner
Hope dies last 🙂
But I’m very glad to have Questa at work.
eine
@eine
In fact, I think I have never used Vivado's simulator. I used ISE's. But I'm also glad to have both GHDL and Questa (with some setup annoyances).
Yatekii
@Yatekii
@eine it is 100% paid as in you pay a premium for the cores.
do you think they work on the tools for free? :D
eine
@eine
@Yatekii, I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
Yatekii
@Yatekii
so they have to pay their engineers for developing vivado etc.
how do you think they are paid?
with revenue from sold chips
and who pays for the chips? yes, you, the vivado user
it is 100% not free
eine
@eine
Oh. Sure! The point is that they do NOT pay their engineers for developing VHDL support, because they believe the revenue is not worth.
Yatekii
@Yatekii
yeah the problem is that afaik they are the market leader by large margin
eine
@eine
The point is whether that's true or just a very subjective and interested analysis of the market.
Yatekii
@Yatekii
at least in perf/architecture, dunno in revenue
so they don't have to improve
which is stupid
and I don't have the money for modelsim tbh
but tbh, no chip manufacturer procides even halfways decent devtools lol
there is no chip manufactuer that provides a proper ide that is not eclipse based or absolute garbage in any other way lol
T. Meissner
@tmeissner
Most of the FPGA vendor tools are crap ;)
eine
@eine
I think that the question of it being free or paid is tangential to the quality of the software. Both GHDL and Questasim are better simulators than XSIM. One is free and the other one is not.
Yatekii
@Yatekii
well altera at least provides a free modelsim version
and afaik 2008 support is way better with other vendors. we at least used it with altera chips
T. Meissner
@tmeissner
The best case is when they provide third party tools for simulation or synthesis, as Lattice & Microsemi do
Yatekii
@Yatekii
@eine well I would use GHDL and even contribute, but it's impossible to use with vivado, because ofc all their macros are SV
eine
@eine
I agree with both comments about eclipse-based crap and about providing licenses for third-party tools (as Lattice).
T. Meissner
@tmeissner
Microsemi provide Modelsim ME, now even with PLUS (dual language)
Yatekii
@Yatekii
well I see a glimmer of hope on the horizon now with vscode etc. and rust emerging :) we'll see. and I hope the same happens for HDL & FPGAs :)