I'm studying opencores DDR controller here:
In file ddr_sdr.vhd here is an excerpt:
architecture behave of ddr_sdr is
-- User Interface
component user_if is
rst_int_n : in std_logic; -- async reset, lo-active
sys_clk : in std_logic;
-- user interface
cmd : in std_logic_vector(U_CMD_WIDTH -1
downto 0); -- command: read, write, nop
cmd_vld : in std_logic;
addr : in std_logic_vector(U_ADDR_WIDTH-1
downto 0); -- ROW, BANK, COLUMN
busy_q : out std_logic; -- busy flag, when
active commands are ignored
-- Datenaustausch mit Controller
init_finished : in boolean;
new_cmd_q : out boolean;
new_cmd_ack : in boolean;
do_prech_q : out boolean; -- precharge followed by
do_wait_q : out boolean; -- additional delay requested
cmd_q : buffer std_logic_vector(U_CMD_WIDTH -1
addr_q : out std_logic_vector(U_ADDR_WIDTH -1
-- Global Buffer BUFG
port ( i : in std_ulogic;
o : out std_ulogic );
-- pragma translate_off
for all: bufg use entity unisim.bufg;
-- pragma translate_on
My question is, in all the syntax rules I can find the
"for all: bufg use entity unisim.bufg;" seems like an error.
Why isn't it
for all: bufg
use entity unisim.bufg;
Where is the "end for;"?
Is this related to the "-- pragma translate_off"?
And more important, WTF is " -- pragma translate_off" supposed
to be doing?
What is all this VOODOO here?
Re: Syntax question
> My question is, in all the syntax rules I can find the
> "for all: bufg use entity unisim.bufg;" seems like an error.
> Why isn't it
> for all: bufg
> use entity unisim.bufg;
> end for;
> Where is the "end for;"?
Good question. I would have expected it to be required as well. For
interest this is a configuration statement selecting bufg from the
xilinx unisim library, as opposed to whatever is in the work library (if
> Is this related to the "-- pragma translate_off"?
Yes and no - its not related to the syntax, but it is related to the
reason the statement's there at all.
> And more important, WTF is " -- pragma translate_off" supposed
> to be doing?
The idea of this pragma is that simulators will ignore it completely
while synthesizers will remove the code between
translate_off/translate_on. If you know C then its somewhat like
Very useful construct that's equally easy to abuse. It's also worth
noting that specific pragma's are not part of the language spec so no
tool is required to implement them. This one seems to be well supported
Re: Syntax question
Andy Ray wrote:
> Very useful construct that's equally easy to abuse. It's also worth
> noting that specific pragma's are not part of the language spec so no
> tool is required to implement them. This one seems to be well supported
Thanks, that all makes a lot of sense. So when I simulate this
with GHDL it'll ignore the --pragmas and will use the correct
model for the entity, but when I go use the xilinx tools to
synthesize, it'll pay attention to the pragmas and know to
cut out the section and instead use a bufg on the FPGA.
That really clears up a lot for me. Thanks again.
|All times are GMT. The time now is 06:03 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.