??? 06/07/13 20:50 Read: times |
#189889 - I wouldn't use FPGA unless I need more than just the core Responding to: ???'s previous message |
The whole point, from where I sit, is to use the soft core to facilitate implementation of a function that's supported by other logic within the programmable device, which logic has to be implemented in programmable hardware. If there's a debugger that supports the MCU core, it probably doesn't support the unique features I've constructed in addition to that core. Since the entire device contains both the MCU and that custom logic, I'm curious how you debug the interactions between the custom hardware and the soft-core. In the past my own experience with this process has been limited to interactions between the logic and a soft-core provided by the FPGA manufacturer, hence, one that's supported by the F{GA mfg's tools.
I'm really curious how one should approach the situation wherein one has to debug what's going on in the code while interacting with the custom logic. RE |
Topic | Author | Date |
OCD for FPGA core | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Serial-to-EC2 reverse engineering | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
C2spec.pdf | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Reality Check...... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Agreed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
multi-threaded | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
FPGA and soft cores | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes ... but which debugger? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Actually no | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Who's "they" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I wouldn't use FPGA unless I need more than just the core | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
FPGA on-chip debugging redundant? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
debugging embedded processors | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
That's good to know. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
nice idea | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Von Neumann first | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
if that were the case ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Poorly chosen acronym... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
On Chip Debug is common | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
On Chip Debug *is* a very good idea indeed! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
PC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
PC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
PC | 01/01/70 00:00 |