Xilinx LogicCore Direct Instantiation

Toolset: ISE/ModelSim_PE/VHDL

I've been asked to modify one of my designs for another application so decided it was time to parameterize it as much of it as possible. I ran into a roadblock changing configuration of CoreGen devices, so was simply going to force the eventual user to go through the GUI for any modifications. Then I RTFM. ;-)

In the Comparator V9.0 Product Specification there an example of direct instantiation (Page 7), which looks like it'll save me a lot of headaches. I can simply use the generics I already have to manipulate the core. My problem is that ISE doesn't find the comparator in the library. I've had the problem (with ModelSim) where the libraries change and I'm pointing to an old copy but I don't know where to tell ISE where the libraries are. I've always used the GUI to generate cores before, but I really like the idea of direct instantiation. I can make my designs far more flexible without a whole lot of work. Anyone with a cluestick?

--
Keith
Reply to
krw
Loading thread data ...

Any reason to not just infer the comparator? VHDL generics make this sort of thing a breeze.

--
Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology
Email address is currently out of order
Reply to
Rob Gaddi

Two things... First, I want to walk before running. I also need to manually instantiate BRAMs and it would be nice to ditch the GUI altogether. It would make managing mu libraries through various core releases much simpler.

Perhaps it's no longer true, but I found that the LogicCore devices were better optimized than the ones that were inferred from HDL. For equality, I'd just infer the thing and be done with it. Long magnitude comparators can have significant delays. At least that's what I've found in the past. (UPDATE: I did a test and inferred the comparators and one level up, even and it still seemed to pass timing (10% buffer through PAR) with the widest compare I expect (32 bits). Perhaps I'll go this way for the comparator anyway. It's simpler.)

I don't need generic for the inferred comparator (other than the ones describing the busses that are already there). ;-)

--
Keith
Reply to
krw

IMO it is good practice to infer first, while bearing this statement in mind. Then you have a portable design which may be largely good enough; you only need to pay attention to instantiation where the inferred design fails size or timing (which does still happen sometimes)

Sounds as if the comparators are good enough now.

- Brian

Reply to
Brian Drummond

Perhaps, but I never know what will be asked next (portability will not). I'd like to have as robust of a design as possible out of the box, since I won't be around to pick up the pieces.

The comparators are good enough and I think I know how to make them faster, if need be. This doesn't do the BRAMs any good though. They're still going to be a PITA.

--
Keith
Reply to
krw

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.