6502.org Forum Projects Code Documents Tools Forum
It is currently Tue May 14, 2024 3:20 am

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » 6502.org Users Forum » Programmable Logic

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 12 posts ] 
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
cbmeeks
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 12:07 am
Posts: 1207
Location: Soddy-Daisy, TN USA
I have to say, I am not a fan of WinCUPL. Which is a polite way of saying the editor is a piece of crap. lol

Anyway...

So I have this code snippet which, when I compile (F9), it produces everything just fine (I have a .JED file to upload).

Code:
/** Address Bus Counter **/
Q14.t = Q13 & Q12 & Q11 & Q10 & Q9 & Q8 & Q7 & Q6 & Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q13.t = Q12 & Q11 & Q10 & Q9 & Q8 & Q7 & Q6 & Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q12.t = Q11 & Q10 & Q9 & Q8 & Q7 & Q6 & Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q11.t = Q10 & Q9 & Q8 & Q7 & Q6 & Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q10.t = Q9 & Q8 & Q7 & Q6 & Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q9.t = Q8 & Q7 & Q6 & Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q8.t = Q7 & Q6 & Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q7.t = Q6 & Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q6.t = Q5 & Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q5.t = Q4 & Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q4.t = Q3 & Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q3.t = Q2 & Q1 & Q0;
Q2.t = Q1 & Q0;
Q1.t = Q0;
Q0.t = !Q0;
[Q15..0].ce = 'h'FFFF;
[Q15..0].ck = S0;
[Q15..0].ar = V9 & !V8 & !V7 & !V6 & !V5 & !V4 & V3 & V2 & !V1 & V0;


Notice the CE of 'h'FFFF.

Now, if I change that to anything else, such as:

Code:
[Q15..0].ce = 'b'0;


Then it compiles OK (no errors) but most of the files get deleted. Including the .JED file.

Further down, I have another example that works just fine using different values for the CE.

Code:
S3.t = S2 & S1 & S0;
S2.t = S1 & S0;
S1.t = S0;
S0.t = 'b'1;
[S3..0].ck = PCLK;
[S3..0].ar = 'b'1;
[S3..0].ce = !HFPD & !HSPD & !HBPD & !VFPD & !VSPD & !VBPD; /** This should only tic in frame, **/


Any idea what I'm doing wrong?

Thanks.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
BigDumbDinosaur
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8182
Location: Midwestern USA
cbmeeks wrote:
I have to say, I am not a fan of WinCUPL. Which is a polite way of saying the editor is a piece of crap. lol

Yep! It sure has its warts.

Quote:
Anyway...

So I have this code snippet which, when I compile (F9), it produces everything just fine (I have a .JED file to upload)...

You didn't indicate which CPLD you are designing for, but I'm guessing it's the 1508, which has ample resources. It sounds as though your design compiled without error, but the fitter couldn't come up with a satisfactory fit.

Have you examined the .LST file for details? Near the end of the file will be a summary of resources used, plus a line that says the design does or doesn't fit. I'm surmising that since the .JED file is not being generated, your design won't fit because too many PTs were generated for one or more macrocells.

Have you already made pin number assignments in your design? If you have, try removing the pin number assignments for all but the critical inputs, e.g., GCLK and GCLR (n.b., PINNODES should not have numbers assigned). If doing so results in your design fitting then you should look in the .LST file to see how the fitter assigned the pins. Also, you may wish to enable logic doubling if you haven't already done so.

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
cbmeeks
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 12:07 am
Posts: 1207
Location: Soddy-Daisy, TN USA
Sorry, yes. It's a 1508.

I don't see a LST file but I see a FIT file which seems to have lots of info.

Now, it seems to be working. So the next time it does this, I will look for a LST file and/or examine the other files generated and share my findings.

Thanks!

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
kernelthread
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 8:02 am
Posts: 165
You could try these scripts from the command line. First run "setup.cmd C:\Wincupl" where the parameter is the directory where Wincupl is installed on your system. Then cd to where your cupl source is and run ccupl.cmd <filename> where filename.PLD is your source. This should at least give error messages if it doesn't work and avoids some of the oddities caused by the GUI application.


Attachments:
scripts.7z [435 Bytes]
Downloaded 56 times
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
BigDumbDinosaur
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8182
Location: Midwestern USA
cbmeeks wrote:
I don't see a LST file but I see a FIT file which seems to have lots of info.

Sorry! I meant the .FIT file, which tells you how the design compiled and was fitted. There should also be a .LST file, even if your design doesn't fit.

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
BigDumbDinosaur
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8182
Location: Midwestern USA
kernelthread wrote:
You could try these scripts from the command line...

What is a .7z file?

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
cbmeeks
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 12:07 am
Posts: 1207
Location: Soddy-Daisy, TN USA
BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
kernelthread wrote:
You could try these scripts from the command line...

What is a .7z file?



7Zip.

Much superior to standard ZIP.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
kernelthread
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 6:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 8:02 am
Posts: 165
BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
kernelthread wrote:
You could try these scripts from the command line...

What is a .7z file?


It's an archive compressed with 7-zip, which you can get from here:https://www.7-zip.org
It gives much better compression than normal zip.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
BigDumbDinosaur
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8182
Location: Midwestern USA
cbmeeks wrote:
BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
kernelthread wrote:
You could try these scripts from the command line...

What is a .7z file?

7Zip.

Much superior to standard ZIP.

If that is the case, why would someone like me not know about it?

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
barrym95838
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:26 pm
Posts: 1929
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
If that is the case, why would someone like me not know about it?

Uhh ... because you're a DINOSAUR? What did I win? :lol:

_________________
Got a kilobyte lying fallow in your 65xx's memory map? Sprinkle some VTL02C on it and see how it grows on you!

Mike B. (about me) (learning how to github)
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
BigDumbDinosaur
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8182
Location: Midwestern USA
barrym95838 wrote:
BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
If that is the case, why would someone like me not know about it?

Uhh ... because you're a DINOSAUR?

Could be.

Quote:
What did I win? :lol:

A bushel of Idaho baking potatoes from last year's harvest. :D

Seriously, I read up a bit on the .7z thingie and couldn't see any reason to use it. In Linux, it doesn't maintain file metadata the way archivers such as tar and cpio do, and unless the object is to funnel the file through the Internet, the somewhat better compression doesn't seem to be much of a gain.

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
kernelthread
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 11:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 8:02 am
Posts: 165
If you're using tar, the archiving is separated from the compression. Here's the results of a quick test of compression tools. The test file was the binutils-2.37.tar and I tried compressing it with 6 different compression tools:

Code:
uncompressed tar        280238080

zip (max compression)    45367358
gzip (max compression)   45367210
bzip2 (max compression)  33888611
7z (max compression)     22917892
lzip (max compression)   22514961
xz (max compression)     22377476


So, 7-zip, xz and lzip are all within a whisker of each other and around 33% smaller than the next best (bzip2). They compress to half the size of standard zip. I'm not sure if xz and lzip are available for windows - I haven't really looked.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 12 posts ] 

Board index » 6502.org Users Forum » Programmable Logic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
6502.org is an ongoing project by Mike Naberezny and contributors.