Modelsim breakpoint on end process.

Hi,
I am trying to place a breakpoint on an "end process" statment.
When I have the following code:

process (A , B)
begin
result <= ('0' & A);
end process;

the "end process" statment is executable and Modelsim lets me place a
breakpoint on the "end process" statment. However if I have the
following code:

P3: process (A , B)
begin
result <= ('0' & A)+('0' & B);
end process;

the "end process" statement is not executable and hence I cannot place
a breakpoint on the line. Does anybody have any idea why this happens.

Thanks

Nitin

nitinyogi80@yahoo.com

wrote:
> Hi,
> I am trying to place a breakpoint on an "end process" statment.
> When I have the following code:
>
> process (A , B)
> begin
> result <= ('0' & A);
> end process;
>
> the "end process" statment is executable and Modelsim lets me place a
> breakpoint on the "end process" statment. However if I have the
> following code:
>
> P3: process (A , B)
> begin
> result <= ('0' & A)+('0' & B);
> end process;
>
> the "end process" statement is not executable and hence I cannot place
> a breakpoint on the line. Does anybody have any idea why this happens.

Try:

end process P3;

-a

Andy Peters

Hi Andy,
Sorry that is'nt working either. Another weird thing I
noticed was. When I have the following code:

P3: process (A) -- just 1 signal is sensitivty list rather than 2
begin
result <= ('0' & A)+('0' & B);
end process P3;

again the "end process" statement becomes executable and I am able to
place a breakpoint on it. Thanks for your suggestion. Does anybody have
any more ideas about getting around this problem.

Thanks

Nitin

nitinyogi80@yahoo.com

wrote:

> the "end process" statment is executable and Modelsim lets me place a
> breakpoint on the "end process" statment. However if I have the
> following code:
>
> P3: process (A , B)
> begin
> result <= ('0' & A)+('0' & B);
> end process;
>
> the "end process" statement is not executable and hence I cannot place
> a breakpoint on the line. Does anybody have any idea why this happens.

Have you tried to use lower optimisation setting, for example start with
-O0. That should preserve all the information for debugging.

--Kim

Kim Enkovaara

wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> Sorry that is'nt working either. Another weird thing I
> noticed was. When I have the following code:
>
> P3: process (A) -- just 1 signal is sensitivty list rather than 2
> begin
> result <= ('0' & A)+('0' & B);
> end process P3;
>
> again the "end process" statement becomes executable and I am able to
> place a breakpoint on it. Thanks for your suggestion. Does anybody have
> any more ideas about getting around this problem.

Make sure that when you analyze and elaborate that you display all
warnings. Maybe something else is going on in other parts of your
code?

-a

Andy Peters

Hi,
Kim, your suggestion worked! You were right, it was doing some
kind of optimizations. When I tried "vcom -O0 adder.vhd", all "end
process" statments are now executable. I'll have to see now whether
lowering the optimization has any adverse effects on what I am trying
to acheive. Thanks Kim. Andy thanks to you too, for your suggestions. I
think keeping all warnings ON will help me debug much better. I'll
write back letting you people know that it's really working.

Thanks

Nitin

nitinyogi80@yahoo.com

wrote:

> Hi,
> Kim, your suggestion worked! You were right, it was doing some
> kind of optimizations. When I tried "vcom -O0 adder.vhd", all "end
> process" statments are now executable. I'll have to see now whether

Modelsim at least in SE versions merge the processes in some cases
with higer optimisation levels. You can see that for example if you
try to force something inside merged process. The path contains merged
word i.e.

change /foobar/#MERGED#proc1,proc2,proc3/var 16#0

--Kim

Kim Enkovaara

Kim Enkovaara wrote:

> Modelsim at least in SE versions merge the processes in some cases
> with higer optimisation levels. You can see that for example if you
> try to force something inside merged process. The path contains merged
> word i.e.
>
> change /foobar/#MERGED#proc1,proc2,proc3/var 16#0

Yes. This is very common with multiple synchronous
processes on the same clk,rst,enable.

This is one reason I started merging processes
myself at the source level.

-- Mike Treseler

Mike Treseler