Open source FPGA EDA Tools

I've used modelsim PE for about 5 years and XE for about 3 under windows and I've found them to be rock solid reliable. I can't ever remember them crashing out from under me like you describe.

Jeff

I've used ModelSim PE for about 5 years, too, and I get semi-frequent (one time in, say, 50 seems about right) crashes, too. The simulation starts running normally, but at some point all of the ModelSim-related windows disappear. I restart the simulator, run the very same simulation, and everything's jake.

This has happened across multiple versions of the simulator and on at least two different PCs, under W2K. It's not a show-stopper, but it is very annoying. I haven't reported it to ModelTech because I have no reliable way of reproducing it.

Bob Perlman Cambrian Design Works

Yes, and actually there is a tcl license notice in the ISE distribution for example. However, I there also is a license note in the parant directory, that states that "BY USING THIS SOFTWARE" you have certain implications and are granted only a limited license.

I really think that this is misleading because it is not made cleare that "THIS SOFTWARE" only applies to some of the software in the subdirectories. Someone who reads the xilinx license note surely does not expect to find additional license notes hidden in subdirectories that grant additional rights to part of the software.

I do not know much about US law, but my copy was distributed in germany, and here both the TCL authors and competitors of Xilinx could sue Xilinx to have this clarified.

Other license notes in the ISE distribution are

*a Java license three directoriy levels lower. *an IEEE VHDL copyright notice

But the distribution also contains perllib which is under GPL and I can not find any GPL notice in the distribution. (Competitors and the FSF could use this fact to stop distribution of the CDs and to call back all copies) Also, I can not find the BSD license for Espresso.

SCO tries to make the world believe, that the open source community does not honor copyright, but this is another case were a proprietary software vendor does not honor the copyright of open source authors.

Please fix this. The missing license notes should be contained in the next service pack.

Kolja Sulimma

i attended gospl forum recently. It was mentioned that Complete software toolset is open along with h/w architecture. All device information required for different software subsystems will be available. Architecture discussed resembles current FPGA architectural trend (4 input LUT based, symmetrical etc etc). It makes sense to start with familiar architecture as it will invite/benefit more people in open source. As architecture too is open to community for innovations, it will certainly make room for ideas which died in the lack of an opportunity. I think this is first of its kind and will finally give us an opportunity to work on fpga development.

Pant

That would be very nice indeed, especially when there are devices available that comply with that architecture.

What I am quite annoyed at right now is that ST starts sooo cautiously with the GOSPL project. You have to apply for a license and they don't let you read the license document before being approved to be allowed to sign it.

They should just put up all the stuff they have for download, with mainstream Free licenses for the software and documentation. No restrictions should be placed on independent devices that comply with the architecture.

to

There was an article on FPGA hardware evolution quite a few years ago that I found fascinating. Unfortunately I could only find an abstract of it on the net (search for 'evolution' on the page): http://216.239.63.104/search?q=cache:AN3SMgtZ_DUJ:

They wanted a certain frequency to come out of the FPGA. The evolution created a unique solution with two internal oscillators were built and combined into a beat frequency. It doesn't give you your bibliography, but it is a small start.

http://216.239.63.104/search?q=cache:AN3SMgtZ_DUJ:

try this one:

Thompson A, Layzell P, Zebulum RS Explorations in design space: Unconventional electronics design through artificial evolution IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION 3 (3): 167-196 SEP 1999

I now have a copy of the license agreement (and STMicroelectronics was very helpful). As expected, GOSPL is not even close to being Open Source or Free Software. It is basically a free of charge, semi-closed industry consortium controlled by STMicroelectronics.

But I believe them when they say that this is only intermittent and the real goal is indeed to go Open Source in the future.

--
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3  331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405

Because "open source" is a registered trademark

and there are restrictions what licenses are acceptable as open source, it looks then like GOSPL is in trademark violation. But then again, I haven't seen the license, nor am I a lawyer. This just makes me wonder the case.

This is very nice to hear. Many times companies have started with restricted license and then later opened up, e.g. Qt/Trolltech of the KDE fame. I'm awaiting with great interest what will happen with GOSPL.

Hmm no, they should be safe:

The Open Source Definition spells out the essential qualities of open source software. Unfortunately, the term "open source" itself is subject to misuse, and because it's descriptive, it can't be protected as a trademark (which would have been our first choice). Since the community needs a reliable way of knowing whether a piece of software really is open source, OSI is registering a certification mark, OSI Certified, for this purpose.