3 ms·
Yes, and it is also a bug riddled mess that is prone to synthesis errors. I am hoping maybe the AMD acquisition will encourage them to open more things up to ge
by trepetti 6y ago
Yes, and it is also a bug riddled mess that is prone to synthesis errors. I am hoping maybe the AMD acquisition will encourage them to open more things up to get more eyes on the synthesis flow and allow more recourse/debugging when issues are encountered.
- FPGAhacker 6y agoWhat synthesis errors have you run into?
- trepetti 6y agoRandom ones requiring keep attributes for no reason on larger designs to keep stuff from being inferred away erroneously. Certain issues with limitations on SV interfaces only supporting constructs used in the "IP integration" scripting as opposed to the full language spec. I am sorry if I came off as overly negative, but I really think the FOSS EDA tools are going to lap them unless they open up somewhat.
- trepetti 6y ago(I am also biased because the designs I work on are small enough that ECP and presumably upcoming Lattice FPGAs are plenty. I am excited by the Xilinx reverse engineering efforts, too. But there seems to be less official interest than we see with Lattice in supporting the OSS efforts.)
- FPGAhacker 6y agoI agree that just about all of the EDA tools are a pretty terrible experience. I’ve gotten tired of dealing with quirks using SV interfaces in RTL. I’m using structs as a substitute at the moment.