Ethernet Interface

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View

Is it possible to interface the Ethernet directly to the FPGA instead
of the doing it through the Power PC processor or any other Processor?
If yes, kindly throw some light on the same.

thanks in advance.


Re: Ethernet Interface

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Did you do some basic googling befor asking?
Start e.g. at http://www.fpga4fun.com /
--
Uwe Bonnes                 snipped-for-privacy@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik  Schlossgartenstrasse 9  64289 Darmstadt
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Ethernet Interface
Hi Surya,

Are you aware that the Xilinx Virtex-4 and Virtex-5 FPGA have an embedded
EMAC block?  Here is a great article to serve as a starting point:
http://www.xilinx.com/publications/xcellonline/xcell_59/xc_pdf/p054-056_59-McKay.pdf

-David

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Ethernet Interface
Dear David,

    Thank you for your link. It was good. I was aware of the EMACs
present in the Virtex 4 and 5. But i was wondering whether it would be
efficient to write the protocol handler to (removing and addition of
header and footer in simple terms) in the FPGA directly or in the PPC.
If it is in PPC i would not be able to use Virtex 5 and hence the EMAC.


   Kindly advise.


Aswin

davide wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://www.xilinx.com/publications/xcellonline/xcell_59/xc_pdf/p054-056_59-McKay.pdf
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: Ethernet Interface
Aswin,

Lets take the Virtex-5 LX50T as an example.  You could utilize a soft
processor core(MicroBlaze) within the fabric for your packet processing and
interface that to the embedded EMAC.  Take a look at XAPP-443
(http://www.xilinx.com/bvdocs/appnotes/xapp443.pdf ).  This provides a good
example of how a soft processor can be designed to manage the EMAC
configuration registers, generate frames, edit frames, etc and provides a
seemless interface to the EMAC.

In terms of efficiency (speed), it is a matter of knowing what your
throughput needs are for the uP and simulating.  In terms of efficiency for
additional hardware requirements and board area, I think the FPGA is more
practical.

-David

Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://www.xilinx.com/publications/xcellonline/xcell_59/xc_pdf/p054-056_59-McKay.pdf
Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Ethernet Interface
Using an embedded processor is the natural way to use these interfaces,
why do you want to omit it?  Also, the embedded hard EMACs are really
meant for GBit ethernet, sure you can use them for 10/100 but why?


Surya wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Site Timeline