"MM" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news: snipped-for-privacy@individual.net...
but
which
FPGA?
1) create a user logic EDK core and add the connections in the XPS/EDK or 2) use the EDK generated system as submodule in ISE projectAntti
"MM" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news: snipped-for-privacy@individual.net...
but
which
FPGA?
1) create a user logic EDK core and add the connections in the XPS/EDK or 2) use the EDK generated system as submodule in ISE projectAntti
Please bear with me, I am just learning how to use EDK... It seems nice, but sort of self-contained. All of the examples and documentation show how to create a processor based system from start to generating a *.bit file, which is great, but what if I need to have some other unrelated logic in the FPGA? What should my tool flow be in that case? Also, how do I approach a project (from the tool flow viewpoint) with more than one processor core?
Thanks, /Mikhail
You can choose to make it a completely self contained EDK project, and I have done one project that way. But I have since moved to embedding the processor/EDK portion in a plain old VHDL project and compiling that with ISE, which I guess Xilinx calls a "ProjNav" implementation flow. I mainly find this a little easier during the design and simulation portion of the project, which is of course the longest phase of a project. EDK adds another layer of stuff to deal with, and I eventually found it to be a minor annoyance, but that is probably just a personal preference.
The one thing I found important to do for this approach was that I implemented a generic register interface for EDK, which allows me to implement the actual registers outside of EDK. Without that step, every time I created a new register with new inputs/outputs, I basically had to rerun EDK. Now, I rarely run the EDK compile, since almost everything I am changing during the design phase is outside the EDK portion.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required