I'm attempting to control an TC8020 mosfet (http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/tc8020.pdf) through a md1715 ultrasound driver (http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/md1715.pdf) to eventually control ultrasound sensors.
i.e. FPGA --> MD1715 --> TC8020 --> Transmitters
From what I can tell in the md1715 truth tables (md1715.pdf page 4), I should be able to drive an output voltage by something like SEL=1, POS=1, NEG=0?
I'm trying to do something like this in my verilog code, but it's been a long time since I've used a HDL. Does something like this make sense? I'm not exactly sure how to change frequencies, etc.
module main(input ADC0CLK,
output SELA, //pin mappings set up to fpga
output POSA,
output NEGA
);
reg r_sel_a;
reg r_pos_a;
reg r_neg_a;
/*
// Hardwire for now just to test output.
// From what I can tell this should drive a constant voltage of 1?
assign SELA = 1'b1;
assign POSA = 1'b1;
assign NEGA = 0;
*/
assign SELA = r_sel_a;
assign POSA = r_pos_a;
assign NEGA = r_neg_a;
always # (posedge ADC0CLK or negedge ADC0CLK)
begin: TRANSMITA
if (ADC0CLK == 1) begin
r_sel_a <= 1'b1;
r_pos_a <= 1'b1;
r_neg_a <= 0;
end else if (ADC0CLK == 0) begin
r_sel_a <= 1'b1;
r_pos_a <= 0;
r_neg_a <= 1'b1;
end
end
endmodule
Much thanks
This code is not synthezisable. You cannot have a process (always) that works on both edges of clock. I see two options here:
You can use 2x faster clock and then your process will work only on posedge of this faster clock.
You can use ODDR primitve. ODDR is a xilinx primitive to drive data on two clock edges, here you can find description of xilinx 7-series IO resources. if you are using FPGA from other vendors then you have to search for such primitive, I found that altera has ALTDDIO_OUT ipcore but I've never used it.
Imo option 2 is better, you shouldn't have timing problems which can occure in first option.
Related
I'm trying to write a RTL model in which I monitor independent clock sources. These clock sources can have variable frequency (range 5 to 50MHz)
Let us say clk1 and clk2. I'm trying to drive a signal 'toggle' which is set '1' at every posedge of clk1 and is set to '0' at every negedge of clk2. I'm having trouble realizing this model.
I tried using 1 flop triggered at the positive edge of clk1 with inputs of this flop tied to 'high' and another flip flop triggered at the negative edge of clk2 with input tied to 'low'. I sent these outputs to a mux, but I have trouble figuring out how to drive the select signal of this mux
Here is my code snippet :
always_ff #(posedge clk1 or rstb) begin
if(!rstb) begin
flop1_out <= 0;
end else begin
flop1_out <= 1;
end
end
always_ff #(negedge clk2) begin
flop2_out <= 0;
end
assign toggle = sel ? flop1 : flop2;
So, as of now nothing is driving sel and trying to figure this out is where I'm having trouble
If I try to drive the same signal (toggle) from 2 different clock sources, I get an error saying that multiple drivers found for signal toggle, which makes sense.
Please let me know if you have any suggestions
EDIT: fixed a typo and removed rstb from the sensitivity list for flop2
assign rstn = clk2;
always # (posedge clk1 or negedge rstn)
if (~rstn)
toggle = 1'b0;
else
toggle <= 1'b1;
note: depending on the clock frequency and insertion delay relationships this circuit may become metastable. if you can tolerate delay, add a synchronizer on the output. better yet, if you can tolerate distortion, add a reset synchronizer on clk2 to clk1mx, where clk1mx is synchronous to clock1 but x times faster.
I Want to Design a Verilog code for Interfacing 16*2 LCD. As in LCD's to give "command" or "data" we have to give LCD's Enable pin a "High to low Pulse " pulse that means
**E=1;
Delay();//Must be 450ns wide delay
E=0;**
This the place where I confuse I means in Verilog for synthesis # are not allowed so how can I give delay here I attached my code below. It must be noted that I try give delay in my code but I think delay not work so please help me to get rid of this delay problem......
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////LCD Interfacing with Xilinx FPGA///////////////////////////////
////////////////////Important code for 16*2/1 LCDs/////////////////////////////////
//////////////////Coder-Shrikant Vaishnav(M.Tech VLSI)/////////////////////////////
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
module lcd_fpgashri(output reg [7:0]data,output reg enb,output reg rs,output reg rw ,input CLK);
reg [15:0]hold;
reg [13:0]count=0;
//Code Starts from here like C's Main......
always#(posedge CLK)
begin
count=count+1; //For Delay
//For LCD Initialization
lcd_cmd(8'b00111000);
lcd_cmd(8'b00000001);
lcd_cmd(8'b00000110);
lcd_cmd(8'b00001100);
//This is a String "SHRI" that I want to display
lcd_data(8'b01010011);//S
lcd_data(8'b01001000);//H
lcd_data(8'b01010010);//R
lcd_data(8'b01001001);//I
end
//Task For Command
task lcd_cmd(input reg [7:0]value);
begin
data=value;
rs=1'b0;
rw=1'b0;
enb=1'b1; //sending high to low pulse
hold=count[13]; //This is the place where I try to design delay
enb=1'b0;
end
endtask
//Task for Data
task lcd_data(input reg [7:0]value1);
begin
data=value1;
rs=1'b1;
rw=1'b0;
enb=1'b1; //sending high to low pulse
hold=count[13]; //This is the place where I try to design delay
enb=1'b0;
end
endtask
endmodule
You seem to be stuck in a software programming mindset based on your code, you're going to have to change things around quite a bit if you want to actually describe a controller in HDL.
Unfortunately for you there is no way to just insert an arbitrary delay into a 'routine' like you have written there.
When you write a software program, it is perfectly reasonable to write a program like
doA();
doB();
doC();
Where each line executes one at a time in a sequential fashion. HDL does not work in this way. You need to not think in terms of tasks, and start thinking in terms of clocks and state machines.
Remember that when you have an always block, the entire block executes in parallel on every clock cycle. When you have a statement like this in an always block:
lcd_cmd(8'b00111000);
lcd_cmd(8'b00000001);
lcd_cmd(8'b00000110);
lcd_cmd(8'b00001100);
This does you no good, because all four of these execute simultaneously on positive edge of the clock, and not in a sequential fashion. What you need to do is to create a state machine, such that it advances and performs one action during a clock period.
If I were to try to replicate those four lcd_cmd's in a sequential manner, it might look something like this.
always #(posedge clk)
case(state_f)
`RESET: begin
state_f <= `INIT_STEP_1;
data = 8'b00111000;
end
`INIT_STEP_1: begin
state_f <= `INIT_STEP_2;
data = 8'b00000001;
end
`INIT_STEP_2: begin
state_f <= `INIT_STEP_3;
data = 8'b00000110;
end
`INIT_STEP_3: begin
state_f <= `INIT_STEP_4;
data =8'b00111000;
end
`INIT_STEP_4: begin
state_f <= ???; //go to some new state
data = 8'b00000110;
end
endcase
end
Now with this code you are advancing through four states in four clock cycles, so you can start to see how you might handle writing a sequence of events that advances on each clock cycle.
This answer doesn't get you all of the way, as there is no 'delay' in between these as you wanted. But you could imagine having a state machine where after setting the data you move into a DELAY state, where you could set a counter which counts down enough clock cycles you need to meet your timing requirements before moving into the next state.
The best way to introduce delay is to use a counter as Tim has mentioned.
Find out how many clock cycles you need to wait to obtain the required delay (here 450ns) w.r.t your clock period.
Lets take the number of clock cycles calculated is count. In that case the following piece of code can get you the required delay. You may however need to modify the logic for your purpose.
always # (posedge clk) begin
if (N == count) begin
N <= 0;
E = ~E;
end else begin
N <= N +1;
end
end
Be sure to initialize N and E to zero.
Check the clock frequency of your FPGA board and initialize a counter accordingly. For example, if you want a delay of 1 second on an FPGA board with 50MHz clock frequency, you will have to write a code for a counter that counts from 0 to 49999999. Use the terminalCLK as clk for your design. Delayed clock input will put a delay to your design. The psuedo code for that will be:
module counter(count,terminalCLK,clk)
parameter n = 26, N = 50000000;
input clk;
output reg [n-1:0] count;
output reg terminalCLK;
always#(posedge clk)
begin
count <= count + 1;
if (count <= N/2)
terminalCLK <= ~terminalCLk;
if (count == N)
terminalCLK <= ~terminalCLk;
end
I'm learning verilog and I think there is something that I must not understand about always #* and always (#posedge clk, ...)
Here is a piece of code supposed to send bits via uart. It fails at synthesization.
The error is
" The logic for does not match a known FF or Latch template. The description style you are using to describe a register or latch is not supported in the current software release."
(and 3 other errors for , and )
If I change the always #(...) by always #*, things fail in the next step ("implement design") because things are not connected.
In the book that I have, they implement an fsmd with an always (posedge clk) for the state, and always #* for the other logic, but I don't understand why this doesn't work.
On another forum, I read that the error could come from too complicated conditions. But I have simplified things too (not code the code here but basically I removed the case(state) and the ifs to have single line assignments with ? : or binary conditions, but it didn't work either)
I have seen this error before in other pieces of code that I wrote but I didn't get to the bottom of it, so if you could help me understand the general problem (with this uart thing as a support for a concrete example), I would be very happy.
Thanks
Thomas
P.S : Im using xilinx spartan 3e starter kit and xilinx ise 14.4
module UART_out #(parameter [3:0] NUM_BITS = 8)
(
input wire baud_clk,
input wire send_tick,
input wire[NUM_BITS-1:0] data_in,
output wire tx,
output wire debug_done
);
localparam
IDLE = 0,
TRANSMIT = 1;
reg[NUM_BITS:0] bits_to_send;
reg state;
reg out_bit;
reg[4:0] cnt;
always #(posedge baud_clk, posedge send_tick)
begin
case (state)
IDLE:
if (send_tick)
begin
bits_to_send <= {data_in, 0};
state <= TRANSMIT;
cnt <= 0;
end
TRANSMIT:
begin
if (cnt < NUM_BITS)
cnt <= cnt + 1;
else
state <= IDLE;
bits_to_send <= {1, bits_to_send[NUM_BITS:1]};
out_bit <= bits_to_send[0];
end
endcase
end
assign tx = (state == IDLE ? 1 : out_bit);
assign debug_done = (state == IDLE);
endmodule
The error:
The logic for does not match a known FF or Latch template. The description style you are using to describe a register or latch is not supported in the current software release.
Is referring to the fact that the synthesis tool does not have any hardware cells to use which match your description.
What hardware do you want from :
always #(posedge baud_clk, posedge send_tick)
This looks like you want a flip-flop with an enable signal. The enable signal (send_tick) should be 1 clock period wide. This is then used to select the path of logic on a clock edge. not as an alternative trigger.
I think that this is all you really need:
always #(posedge baud_clk) begin
case (state)
IDLE:
if (send_tick) begin
//...
end
//...
endcase
end
If send_tick is from another clock domain then you will need to do some clock domain crossing to turn it it to a clock wide pulse on the baud_clk.
You may be getting confused with blocks which have multiple triggers, they are normally a clk and reset. A negedge reset_n or posedge reset are often added for reset (initialisation) conditions.
If adding a reset :
always #(posedge baud_clk or negedge reset_n) begin
if (~reset_n) begin
//reset conditions
state <= IDLE;
//...
end
else begin
// Standard logic
end
end
You will notice that there is a very definite structure here, if reset else ... The synthesis tools recognise this as a flip-flop with an asynchronous reset. The data in the reset condition is also static, typically setting everything to zero.
Recently, I had seen some D flip-flop RTL code in verilog like this:
module d_ff(
input d,
input clk,
input reset,
input we,
output q
);
always #(posedge clk) begin
if (~reset) begin
q <= 1'b0;
end
else if (we) begin
q <= d;
end
else begin
q <= q;
end
end
endmodule
Does the statement q <= q; necessary?
Does the statement q <= q; necessary?
No it isn't, and in the case of an ASIC it may actually increase area and power consumption. I'm not sure how modern FPGAs handle this. During synthesis the tool will see that statement and require that q be updated on every positive clock edge. Without that final else clause the tool is free to only update q whenever the given conditions are met.
On an ASIC this means the synthesis tool may insert a clock gate(provided the library has one) instead of mux. For a single DFF this may actually be worse since a clock gate typically is much larger than a mux but if q is 32 bits then the savings can be very significant. Modern tools can automatically detect if the number of DFFs using a shared enable meets a certain threshold and then choose a clock gate or mux appropriately.
In this case the tool needs 3 muxes plus extra routing
always #(posedge CLK or negedge RESET)
if(~RESET)
COUNT <= 0;
else if(INC)
COUNT <= COUNT + 1;
else
COUNT <= COUNT;
Here the tool uses a single clock gate for all DFFs
always #(posedge CLK or negedge RESET)
if(~RESET)
COUNT <= 0;
else if(INC)
COUNT <= COUNT + 1;
Images from here
As far as simulation is concerned, removing that statement should not change anything, since q should be of type reg (or logic in SystemVerilog), and should hold its value.
Also, most synthesis tools should generate the same circuit in both cases since q is updated using a non-blocking assignment. Perhaps a better code would be to use always_ff instead of always (if your tool supports it). This way the compiler will check that q is always updated using a non-blocking assignment and sequential logic is generated.
I am trying to create a counter in verilog which counts how many clock cycles there have been and after ten million it will reset and start again.
I have created a twenty four bit adder module along with another module containing twenty four D Flip flops to store the count of the cycles outputted from the adder.
I then want to have a state machine which is in the count state until ten million cycles have passed then it goes to a reset state.
Does this sound right? The problem is I am not sure how to implement the state machine.
Can anyone point me to a website/book which could help me with this?
thanks
As Paul S already mentioned, there is no need for a state machine if you want your counter to keep counting after an overflow. You can do something like this (untested, might contain typos):
module overflow_counter (
clk,
reset,
enable,
ctr_out
);
// Port definitions
input clk, reset, enable;
output [23:0] ctr_out;
// Register definitions
reg [23:0] reg_ctr;
// Assignments
assign ctr_out = reg_ctr;
// Counter behaviour - Asynchronous active-high reset
initial reg_ctr <= 0;
always # (posedge clk or posedge reset)
begin
if (reset) reg_ctr <= 0;
else if (enable)
begin
if (reg_ctr == 10000000) reg_ctr <= 0;
else reg_ctr <= reg_ctr + 1;
end
end
endmodule
Of course, normally you'd use parameters so you don't have to make a custom module every time you want an overflowing counter. I'll leave that to you ;).
[Edit] And here are some documents to help you with FSM. I just searched Google for "verilog state machine":
EECS150: Finite State Machines in Verilog
Synthesizable Finite State Machine Design Techniques
I haven't read the first paper, so I can't comment on that. The 2nd one shows various styles of coding FSMs, among which the 3 always blocks style, which I highly recommend, because it's a lot easier to debug (state transitions and FSM output are neatly separated). The link seems to be down, so here is the cached Google result.
You don't need a state machine. You already have state in the counter. All you need to do is detect the value you want to wrap at and load 0 into your counter at that point
In pseudo-code:
if count == 10000000 then
nextCount = 0;
else
nextCount = count + 1;
...or...
nextCount = count + 1;
if count == 10000000 then
resetCount = 1;
State machines are not too tricky. Use localparam (with a width, don't forget the width, not shown here because it is just one bit) to define labels for your states. Then create two reg variables (state_reg, state_next). The _reg variable is your actual register. The _next variable is a "wire reg" (a wire that can be assigned to inside a combinational always block). The two things to remember are to do X_next = X_reg; in the combinational always block (and then the rest of the combinational logic) and X_reg <= X_next; in the sequential always block. You can get fancy for special cases but if you stick to these simple rules then things should just work. I try not to use instantiation for very simple things like adders since Verilog has great support for adders.
Since I work with FPGAs, I assign initial values to my registers and I don't use a reset signal. I'm not sure but for ASIC design I think it is the opposite.
localparam STATE_RESET = 1'b0, STATE_COUNT = 1'b1;
reg [23:0] cntr_reg = 24'd0, cntr_next;
reg state_reg = STATE_COUNT, state_next;
always #* begin
cntr_next = cntr_reg; // statement not required since we handle all cases
if (cntr_reg == 24'd10_000_000)
cntr_next = 24'd0;
else
cntr_next = cntr_reg + 24'd1;
state_next = state_reg; // statement required since we don't handle all cases
case (state_reg)
STATE_COUNT: if (cntr_reg == 24'd10_000_000) state_next = STATE_RESET;
endcase
end
always #(posedge clk) begin
cntr_reg <= cntr_next;
state_reg <= state_next;
end
I found this book to be very helpful. There is also a VHDL version of the book, so you can use both side-by-side as a Rosetta Stone to learn VHDL.