We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
The DRP address width is defined as nine bits: https://github.com/ipbus/ipbus-firmware/blob/master/components/ipbus_slaves/firmware/hdl/drp_decl.vhd#L41
However, there are many DRP ports around that are wider. For example the GTY common DRP addresses are ten bits (see table 2-24 in https://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/ip_documentation/gtwizard_ultrascale/v1_1/pg182-gtwizard-ultrascale.pdf). Under certain conditions these addresses are actually generated with a 16-bit width, but that may be a Vivado issue.
Could we please just bump this address width definition to 16 bits everywhere, and trust the optimiser to get rid of any unused bits?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Ok, after a bit of digging, and reading the latest version of the documentation (https://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/ip_documentation/gtwizard_ultrascale/v1_7/pg182-gtwizard-ultrascale.pdf, table 2-24), it turns out that the UltraScale+ GTH and GTY indeed have 16-bit COMMON DRP addresses.
I'll generate a pull request preparing for an expansion of the DRP address in drp_decl.vhd.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This was handled in PR #153.
No branches or pull requests
The DRP address width is defined as nine bits:
https://github.com/ipbus/ipbus-firmware/blob/master/components/ipbus_slaves/firmware/hdl/drp_decl.vhd#L41
However, there are many DRP ports around that are wider. For example the GTY common DRP addresses are ten bits (see table 2-24 in https://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/ip_documentation/gtwizard_ultrascale/v1_1/pg182-gtwizard-ultrascale.pdf). Under certain conditions these addresses are actually generated with a 16-bit width, but that may be a Vivado issue.
Could we please just bump this address width definition to 16 bits everywhere, and trust the optimiser to get rid of any unused bits?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: