I currently have this code(below) for a debouncer for a button on an fpga, however I am getting an error that says "Multiple event control statements in one always/initial process block are not supported in this case." whenever I try to synthesize the desgin. The line that causes the problem is the #(posedge clk) but I'm wondering how exactly to replace this logic. What I essentially require is always # (quarter & posedge clk)as the sensitivity list for the first always block but this does not work either. I am fairly new to the language so I'm still working out a few syntax kinks.Snippet of Code is below:
always #(quarter)
begin
#(posedge clk)
begin
if (quarter != new) begin new <= quarter; count <= 0; end
else if (count == DELAY) cleanq <= new;
else count <= count+1;
end
end
instead of always
#(posedge event1)
#(posedge event2)
create aflag (1bit reg) event2done : reg event2done; initial event2done=0;
always#(posedge event1)
begin if (!event2done & event 2)
// event2done=1; + type ur code
else if(event2done & !event 2)
event2done =0; end
pseudo code:
always#(something1)
#(something2)
do something
Look in the comments to see explanation as to why this isn't synthesizable
always #(posedge clk)
/* over here you'll have to set the default values
for everything that's being changed in this always block,
you'll otherwise generate latches. Which is likely
not what you want */
begin
if (quarter != new) begin new <= quarter; count <= 0; end
else if (count == DELAY) cleanq <= new;
else count <= count+1;
end
I don't have access to my verilog rig at the moment so I can't confirm the syntax correctness
Related
I have tried writing a small verilog module that will find the maximum of 10 numbers in an array. At the moment I am just trying to verify the correctness of the module without going into specific RTL methods that will to do such a task.
I am just seeing a a couple of registers when I am synthesizing this module. Nothing more that that. Ideally the output should be 7 which is at index 4 but I am seeing nothing neither on FPGA board or in the test bench. What I am doing wrong with this ?
module findmaximum(input clk,rst,output reg[3:0]max, output reg[3:0]index);
reg [3:0]corr_Output[0:9];
always#(posedge clk or posedge rst)
if(rst)
begin
corr_Output[0]=0;
corr_Output[1]=0;
corr_Output[2]=0;
corr_Output[3]=0;
corr_Output[4]=0;
corr_Output[5]=0;
corr_Output[6]=0;
corr_Output[7]=0;
corr_Output[8]=0;
corr_Output[9]=0;
end
else
begin
corr_Output[0]=0;
corr_Output[1]=0;
corr_Output[2]=0;
corr_Output[3]=0;
corr_Output[4]=7;
corr_Output[5]=0;
corr_Output[6]=0;
corr_Output[7]=0;
corr_Output[8]=0;
corr_Output[9]=0;
end
integer i;
always#(posedge clk or posedge rst)
if(rst)
begin
max=0;
index=0;
end
else
begin
max = corr_Output[0];
for (i = 0; i <= 9; i=i+1)
begin
if (corr_Output[i] > max)
begin
max = corr_Output[i];
index = i;
end
end
end
endmodule
Looking are your code, the only possible outputs are max=0,index=0 and a clock or two after reset max=7,index=4. Therefore, your synthesizer is likely optimizing the code with equivalent behavior with simpler logic.
For your find max logic to be meaningful, you need to change the values of corr_Output periodically. This can be done via input writes, LFSR (aka pseudo random number generator), and or other logic.
Other issues:
Synchronous logic (updated on a clock edge) should be assigned by with non-blocking (<=). Combinational logic should be assigned with blocking (=). When this guideline is not followed there is a risk of behavior differences between simulation and synthesis. In the event you need to compare with intermediate values (like your original max and index), then you need to separate the logic into two always blocks like bellow. See code bellow.
Also, FPGAs tend to have limited asynchronous reset support. Use synchronous reset instead by removing the reset from the sensitivity list.
always#(posedge clk) begin
if (rst) begin
max <= 4'h0;
index <= 4'h0;
end
else begin
max <= next_max;
index <= next_index;
end
always #* begin
next_max = corr_Output[0];
next_index = 4'h0;
for (i = 1; i <= 9; i=i+1) begin // <-- start at 1, not 0 (0 is same a default)
if (corr_Output[i] > next_max) begin
next_max = corr_Output[i];
next_index = i;
end
end
end
How to fix multiple driver , default value and combinational loop problems in the code below?
always #(posedge clk)
myregister <= #1 myregisterNxt;
always #* begin
if(reset)
myregisterNxt = myregisterNxt +1;
else if(flag == 1)
myregister = myregister +2;
end
right there are at least 3 issues in your code:
you are driving myregister within 2 different always blocks. Synthesis will find multiple drivers there. Simulation results will be unpredictable. The rule: you must drive a signal within a single always block.
you ave a zero-delay loop over myregisterNxt = myregisterNxt +1. Since you are using a no-flop there, it is a real loop in simulation and in hardware. You need to break such loops with flops
#1 delay is not synthesizable and it is not needed here at all.
You have not described what you were trying to build and it is difficult to figure it out from our code sample. In general, reset is used to set up initial values. So, something like the following could be a template for you.
always #(posedge clk) begin
if (reset)
myregister <= 0;
else
myregister <= myregister + increment;
end
always #* begin
if (flag == 1)
increment = 1;
else
increment = 2;
end
the flop with posedge clk and nonblocking assignments will not be in a loop.
I am trying to implement a module in my project for which i need the final value to be stable for a while, hence implemented as below. both of them are showing the same result in simulation. will the tool generate same hardware or different one?
always #(posedge clk) begin
if(en)
count <= count + 1;
else
begin
a <= count;
count <= 0;
end
if(count == 0) b <= a;
end
what is the difference between above coding style and the one below? Does it make any difference while synthesis?
always #(posedge clk) begin
if(en)
count <= count + 1;
else
begin
a <= count;
count <= 0;
end
end
always #(posedge clk) begin
if(count == 0)
b <= a;
end
And I am using Vivado 2015.4 tool for synthesis.
It will generate the same hardware output. It doesn't matter if you split clocked statements into one or multiple always-statements, as long as they are functionally identical.
will the tool generate same hardware or different one?
Click "open elaborated design" in Vivado and see for yourself!
But what you'll find is: they're equivalent. No difference whatsoever.
I would like to generate a number of statements inside a clocked process, seen below:
parameter C_INPUT_LENGTH = 32;
parameter C_OUTPUT_NUM_BITS = 5;
reg [C_OUTPUT_NUM_BITS-1:0] address;
reg [C_INPUT_LENGTH-1:0] vector_i;
always#(posedge clk) begin
if(rst) begin
address <= 0;
end
else begin
if (vector_i[0] == 1) begin
address <= 0;
end
if (vector_i[1] == 1) begin
address <= 1;
end
...
if (vector_i[C_INPUT_LENGTH-1] == 1) begin
address <= C_INPUT_LENGTH-1;
end
end
end // always# (posedge clk)
I did so like this:
integer forcount;
always#(posedge clk) begin
if(rst) begin
address <= 0;
end
else begin
for (forcount = 0;forcount <= C_INPUT_LENGTH-1 ;forcount = forcount + 1) begin
if (vector_i[forcount] == 1) begin <--
address <= forcount;
end
end
end
end // always# (posedge clk)
Xilinx vivado (2014.1) gives the following error, referring to the line indicated above:
[Synth 8-903] failed to generate logic
I've done this before using a similar method in the past and it has worked, what am I doing wrong? How do I generate these if statements?
According to Xilinx, this is a known bug documented under CR 801365. The use of an integer as a loop counter causes this issue in some cases. It's due to be fixed in vivado 2014.3.
The solution is to replace the integer with a signal type reg of appropriate size.
Is your input vector_i one-hot? The code you wrote doesn't guarantee that address will only be written to one value. Try this:
for (forcount = 0;forcount <= C_INPUT_LENGTH-1 ;forcount = forcount + 1) begin
if (vector_i[forcount] == 1) begin
address <= forcount;
break;
end
end
Adding the break statement will break out of the for loop the first time the condition is true. Note that this will generate some carry-chain logic and you might get better results with a case statement.
As a temporary work-around, you could consider using a generate statement.
For example:
genvar i;
always #(posedge clk) begin
if (rst) begin
address <= 0;
end else begin
generate
for (i = 0; i < C_INPUT_LENGTH; i = i + 1) begin: foreach_input
if (vector_i[i]) address <= i;
end
endgenerate
end // if (rst)
end // always #(posedge clk)
edit: oh, never mind -- I missed the bit above where Xilinx's recommended workaround is to simply use a dimensioned variable rather than "integer" for the iterator. That would be easier!
I am trying to pass an integer value to a module, but the IF statement does not work with the parameter. It throws the following error. I am new to Verilog so I have no idea how to make this work.
Error (10200): Verilog HDL Conditional Statement error at clock_divider.v(17):
cannot match operand(s) in the condition to the corresponding edges in the enclosing
event control of the always construct
clock_divider.v module
module clock_divider (clockHandler, clk, rst_n, clk_o);
parameter DIV_CONST = 10000000 ; // 1 second
parameter DIV_CONST_faster = 10000000 / 5;
input clockHandler;
input clk;
input rst_n;
output reg clk_o;
reg [31:0] div;
reg en;
integer div_helper = 0;
always # (posedge clk or negedge rst_n)
begin
if(clockHandler == 0)
begin div_helper = DIV_CONST;
end
else
begin div_helper = DIV_CONST_faster;
end
if (!rst_n)
begin div <= 0;
en <= 0;
end
else
begin
if (div == div_helper)
begin div <= 0;
en <= 1;
end
else
begin div <= div + 1;
en <= 0;
end
end
end
always # (posedge clk or negedge rst_n)
begin
if (!rst_n)
begin
clk_o <= 1'b0;
end
else if (en)
clk_o <= ~clk_o;
end
endmodule
main.v module
reg clockHandler = 1;
// 7-seg display mux
always # (*)
begin
case (SW[2:0])
3'b000: hexdata <= 16'h0188;
3'b001: hexdata <= register_A ;
3'b010: hexdata <= program_counter ;
3'b011: hexdata <= instruction_register ;
3'b100: hexdata <= memory_data_register_out ;
3'b111: hexdata <= out;
default: hexdata <= 16'h0188;
endcase
if(SW[8] == 1)
begin
clockHandler = 1;
end
else
begin
clockHandler = 0;
end
end
HexDigit d0(HEX0,hexdata[3:0]);
HexDigit d1(HEX1,hexdata[7:4]);
HexDigit d2(HEX2,hexdata[11:8]);
HexDigit d3(HEX3,hexdata[15:12]);
clock_divider clk1Hzfrom50MHz (
clockHandler,
CLOCK_50,
KEY[3],
clk_1Hz
);
It's my understanding that the first statement in a verilog always block must be the if(reset) term if you're using an asynchronous reset.
So the flop construct should always look like this:
always # (posedge clk or negedge rst_n) begin
if(~rst_n) begin
...reset statements...
end else begin
...all other statements...
end
end
So for your case you should move the if(clockHandler==0) block inside the else statement, because it is not relevant to the reset execution. Even better would be to move it into a separate combinational always block, since mixing blocking and nonblocking statements inside an always block is generally not a good idea unless you really know what you're doing. I think it is fine in your case though.
To add to Tim's answer - the original code (around line 17, anyway) is valid Verilog.
What it's saying is "whenever there's a rising edge on clk or a falling edge on rst_n, check clockHandler and do something" (by the way, get rid of the begin/ends; they're redundant and verbose). The problem comes when you want to implement this in real hardware, so the error message is presumably from a synthesiser, which needs more than valid Verilog. The synth suspects that it has to build a synchronous element of some sort, but it can't (or won't, to be precise) handle the case where clockHandler is examined on an edge of both clk and rst_n. Follow the rules for synthesis templates, and you won't get this problem.
is this a compilation error or synthesis error? i used the same code to see if it compiles fine, and i din get errors.. Also, it is recommended to use "<=" inside synchronous blocks rather than "="
You're using the same flop construct for two different things. Linearly in code this causes a slipping of states. I always place everything within one construct if the states rely on that clock or that reset, otherwise you require extra steps to make sure more than one signal isn't trying to change your state.
You also don't need the begin/end when it comes to the flop construct, Verilog knows how to handle that for you. I believe Verilog is okay with it though, but I generally don't do that. You also don't have to use it when using a single statement within a block.
So your first module would look like this (if I missed a block somewhere just let me know):
clock_divider.v module (edited)
module clock_divider (clockHandler, clk, rst_n, clk_o);
parameter DIV_CONST = 10000000 ; // 1 second
parameter DIV_CONST_faster = 10000000 / 5;
input clockHandler;
input clk;
input rst_n;
output reg clk_o;
reg [31:0] div;
reg en;
integer div_helper = 0;
always # (posedge clk or negedge rst_n)
begin
if(!rst_n)
begin
div <= 0;
en <= 0;
clk_o <= 1'b0;
end
else if(en)
begin
clk_o <= ~ clk_o;
if(clockHandler == 0)
begin
div_helper = DIV_CONST;
end
else
begin
div_helper = DIV_CONST_faster;
end
else
begin
if (div == div_helper)
begin
div <= 0;
en <= 1;
end
end
else
begin
div <= div + 1;
en <= 0;
end
end
end
end module
If that clk_o isn't meant to be handled at the same time those other operations take place, then you can separate everything else with a general 'else' statement. Just be sure to nest that second construct as an if-statement to check your state.
And also remember to add always # (posedge clk or negedge rst_n) to your main.v module as Tim mentioned.