??? 03/06/06 18:49 Read: times |
#111424 - re: not exactly Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Richard Erlacher said:
The BIG thing with CPLD's as opposed to FPGA's is that the timing is quite deterministic and mostly quite independent of which macrocell is used for which function, while FPGA timing can be severely impacted by signal routing delays. That's why it's easier to use the CPLD's. True. But what always annoyed me about the CPLD fitter tools until recently is that they would tell you how many logic levels your design required, rather than telling you the maximum clock frequency and/or combinatorial delay time. Cripes, the tools are run on a computer; surely, the computer can't do the hard work of mapping logic levels to delays and give me a number? Oy. Yes, Lattice, I'm talkin' 'bout you! First of all, you can preassign the pinout with very high confidence that it will work out as you plan. Except in the cases where you're filling the whole chip and you can't route between sections, but if you blow away pinouts it fits fine. Ugh. Having said that, we always do layouts in parallel with CPLD/FPGA logic design, and rarely (but it still happens) do we run into this problem. It was a lot worse in the Old Days of FPGAs where you really had to let the tools choose the pinout. CPLD's however, have relatively few registers and lots of logic potential. However, in either device type, once you use a register or gate, the entire logic element (or half or quarter element, in some FPGA structures) is used, whether it's an inverter or a tristate flipflop with set/reset and enable. Not true any more! Modern devices have enough routing resources to let you use the flip-flop independently of the rest of the logic in the macrocell/slice. This is especially true for FPGAs, where there are a lot of flip-flops and sometimes you need wide logic (address decoders, whatever). -a |
Topic | Author | Date |
Atera FPGAs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Correction | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Careful, now ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
modelsim is fine for altera fpgas | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Maybe, but probably not for these parts | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
you use it seperatly | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
aye, there's the rub ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
However with altera tools | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Have you tried that? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
yep just done it now with baseline | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re: the rub | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Altera EPLDs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
not exactly | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re: not exactly | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Maybe you can show me ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
FPGA thoughts | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
We all have thoughts... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Maxplus or Quartus | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Do they have free simulation? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Programmer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Altera free simulator | 01/01/70 00:00 |