I am trying to write a program in Verilog that should "move" a light LED on an array of LEDs. With a button the light should move to the left, with another one it should move to the right. This is my code:
module led_shift(UP, DOWN, RES, CLK, LED);
input UP, DOWN, RES, CLK;
output reg [7:0] LED;
reg [7:0] STATE;
always#(negedge DOWN or negedge UP or negedge RES)
begin
if(!RES)
begin
STATE <= 8'b00010000;
end
else
begin
STATE <= UP ? STATE>>1 : STATE<<1;
end
end
always # (posedge CLK)
begin
LED <= STATE;
end
endmodule
The problem is in STATE <= UP ? STATE>>1 : STATE<<1; and the error the following:
Error (10200): Verilog HDL Conditional Statement error at led_shift.v(34): cannot match operand(s) in the condition to the corresponding edges in the enclosing event control of the always construct
I tried to modify the code without using that kind of if:
always#(negedge DOWN or negedge UP or negedge RES)
begin
if(!RES)
STATE <= 8'b00010000;
else
begin
if(!DOWN)
STATE <= STATE<<1;
else
begin
if(!UP)
STATE <= STATE>>1;
else
STATE <= STATE;
end
end
end
It compiles, but does not work: the LED "moves" only to the left, when I press the other button all LEDs shut down. Probably there is a problem in my code, but I cannot understand why my first code does not compile at all.
Thank you for any help!
harrym
It is not clear for the synthesizer to know how to control STATE with the 3 asynchronous control signals.
Most likely your your synthesizer is trying to map STATE to a D flip flop with asynchronous active low set and reset. For example it might be trying to synthesize to something like:
dff state_0_(.Q(STATE[0], .CLK(DOWN), .SET_N(UP), .RST_N(RES(, .D(/*...*/));
In a real flop with asynchronous set and reset, the default should be consent and would explain the error in your first code. In your second attempt, UP becomes part of the combination logic cloud along with DOWN. DOWN is also being used as a clock. Since UP is not a clock, shifting continuously happens while UP is low, completely shifting the on bit out instantly. Another error for the second case would actually be more appropriate.
For the synthesizer to do a better job, you first need to synchronize your asynchronous control signals. Use the same technique as CDC (clock domain crossing; A paper by Cliff Cummings goes into detains here). A basic example:
always #(posedge clk) begin
pre_sync_DOWN <= DOWN;
sync_DOWN <= pre_sync_DOWN;
end
Now that the controls signals are synchronized, make STATE the output of your combination logic. Example:
always #* begin
if(!sync_RES)
STATE = 8'b00010000;
else
case({sync_UP,sync_DOWN})
2'b01 : STATE = LED>>1;
2'b10 : STATE = LED<<1;
default: STATE = LED;
endcase
end
With everything running on one clock domain and explicitly defined combination logic, the synthesizer can construct equivalent logic using flops and basic gates.
FYI:
To shift only on a negedge event you need to keep the last sync value and check for the high to low transition. Remember to swap sync_ with do_ in the combination logic that drives STATE.
always #(posedge clk)
keep_DOWN <= sync_DOWN;
always #*
do_DOWN = (keep_DOWN && !sync_DOWN);
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'm trying to write a roll shift/ ring counter that takes two switches as the clocks in verilog.
My code is as follows:
module roll(CLK1, CLK2, LEDS);
input CLK1;
input CLK2;
output [3:0] LEDS;
reg [3:0] LEDS;
initial
begin
LEDS = 4'b0001;
end
always#(posedge CLK1 or posedge CLK2)
begin
if(CLK1)
begin
LEDS[3]<=LEDS[2];
LEDS[2]<=LEDS[1];
LEDS[1]<=LEDS[0];
LEDS[0]<=LEDS[3];
end
// Roll Right
if(CLK2)
begin
LEDS[3]<=LEDS[0];
LEDS[2]<=LEDS[3];
LEDS[1]<=LEDS[2];
LEDS[0]<=LEDS[1];
end
end
endmodule
I tried using two always blocks, but then figured out that I cannot do that. and when I have the posedge CLK2 in the always statement, the leds on my FPGA all stay on.
Remember Verilog is not a programming language it is a hardware description language.
And when coding for synthesis, you will only be successful if you write code that can be instantiated with actual gates. So writing an always block with sensitivity to edges of two different signals can't be synthesized unless the response to one of the two signals has the effect of a RESET or PRESET operation.
Your code also logically doesn't do what it seems you want to. Consider what your code says will happen if there is a rising edge on CLK2 when CLK1 is already high (or vice versa). Your lights will roll left and then immediately roll right gain, resulting in no change.
A more usual approach would be to have a clock running much faster than the UP and DOWN inputs are expected to change, and use that to drive the logic. For example
module roller(input clk, input rst, input UP, input DOWN, output reg LEDS[3:0]);
reg UP1, DOWN1;
always #(posedge clk or posedge rst)
if (rst) begin
LEDS[3:0] <= 4'b0001;
end
else
begin
UP1 <= UP;
DOWN1 <= DOWN;
if (UP & ~UP1) begin
LEDS[3:0] <= {LEDS[2:0], LEDS[3]};
end
else if (DOWN & ~DOWN1) begin
LEDS[3:0] <= {LEDS[0], LEDS[3:1]};
end
end
endmodule;
Notice that this gives priority to UP. If both UP and DOWN are asserted, the pattern will roll "up" rather than down. If you want a different behavior, you'd have to modify the code to achieve it.
Is there any other functionality like always (that would only run if the sensitive signal changes and won't iterate as long as signal stays the same) which can be cascaded, separately or within the always , but is synthesizable in Verilog.
While I don't think there's a construct specifically like this in Verilog, there is an easy way to do this. If you do an edge detect on the signal you want to be sensitive to, you can just "if" on that in your always block. Like such:
reg event_detected;
reg [WIDTH-1:0] sensitive_last;
always # (posedge clk) begin
if (sensitive_signal != sensitive_last) begin
event_detected <= 1'b1;
end else begin
event_detected <= 1'b0;
end
sensitive_last <= sensitive_signal;
end
// Then, where you want to do things:
always # (posedge clk) begin
if (event_detected ) begin
// Do things here
end
end
The issue with doing things with nested "always" statements is that it isn't immediately obvious how much logic it would synthesize to. Depending on the FPGA or ASIC architecture you would have a relatively large register and extra logic that would be instantiated implicitly, making things like waveform debugging and gate level synthesis difficult (not to mention timing analysis). In a world where every gate/LUT counts, that sort of implicitly defined logic could become a major issue.
The assign statement is the closest to always you you can get. assign can only be for continuous assignment. The left hand side assignment must be a wire; SystemVerilog also allows logic.
I prefer the always block over assign. I find simulations give better performance when signals that usually update at the same time are group together. I believe the optimizer in the synthesizer can does a better job with always, but this might depend on the synthesizer being used.
For synchronous logic you'll need an always block. There is no issue reading hardware switches within the always block. The fpga board may already de-bounce the input for you. If not, then send the input through a two phase pipe line before using it with your code. This helps with potential setup/hold problems.
always #(posedge clk) begin
pre_sync_human_in <= human_in;
sync_human_in <= pre_sync_human_in;
end
always #* begin
//...
case( sync_human_in )
0 : // do this
1 : // do that
// ...
endcase
//...
end
always #(posedge clk) begin
//...
if ( sync_human_in==0 ) begin /* do this */ end
else begin /* else do */ end
//...
end
If you want to do a hand-shake having the state machine wait for a human to enter a multi-bit value, then add to states that wait for the input. One state that waits for not ready (stale bit from previous input), and the other waiting for ready :
always #(posedge clk) begin
case(state)
// ...
PRE_HUMAN_IN :
begin
// ...
state <= WAIT_HUMAN__FOR_NOT_READY;
end
WAIT_HUMAN_FOR_NOT_READY :
begin
// ready bit is still high for the last input, wait for not ready
if (sync_human_in[READ_BIT])
state <= WAIT_HUMAN_FOR_NOT_READY;
else
state <= WAIT_HUMAN_FOR_READY;
end
WAIT_HUMAN_FOR_READY :
begin
// ready bit is low, wait for it to go high before proceeding
if (sync_human_in[READ_BIT])
state <= WORK_WITH_HUMAN_INPUT;
else
state <= WAIT_HUMAN_FOR_READY;
end
// ...
endcase
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.
I am very new to HDL language. I have a question about how to program a shift register. (i know i shift to the other direction). Why does the book use wire[N-1:0] r_next? what's drawback of my implementation?
thanks
my first try is as following
module lesson04#(parameter N=8)(
input wire clk, reset,
input wire data,
output wire out
);
reg [N-1: 0] r_reg;
always #(posedge clk or negedge reset)
begin
if(!reset)
r_reg =0;
else
r_reg[0]=data;
r_reg = r_reg<<1;
end
assign out =r_reg[N-1];
endmodule
but the book gives:
module lesson04#(parameter N=8)(
input wire clk, reset,
input wire data,
output wire out
);
reg [N-1: 0] r_reg;
wire[N-1:0] r_next;
always #(posedge clk or negedge reset)
begin
if(!reset)
r_reg =0;
else
r_reg <= r_next;
end
assign r_next= {data, r_reg[N-1:1]};
assign out =r_reg[N-1];
endmodule
First of all, don't forget your begin-ends around sections of code:
else begin
r_reg[0]=data;
r_reg = r_reg<<1;
end
Without this, only r_reg[0]=data will be in the else clause of the if statement. This will work, but is considered bad style due to the blocking statements in a sequential logic description...
Second, for modeling sequential blocks, use nonblocking assignments (<=) or your calculations may 'fall through' (google nonblocking vs blocking for more info). Your example may very well work (did you try it in a simulator?) but if things get more complicated and more variables are added things can break.
always #(posedge clk or negedge reset)
begin
if(!reset)
r_reg <= 0;
else begin // This is horrible! Don't write code like this!
r_reg[0] = data; // blocking
r_reg <= r_reg<<1; // non-blocking
end
end
For the above reason, it is sometimes recommended that combo logic is separated from sequential logic so that you can write nonblocking assignments to registers in sequential blocks, and blocking in combo blocks and never have to worry about the scheduling.
To code in this way, you need to calculate what the next output should be using the current state, hence the r_next bus in the answer. I think it tends to help the synthesis tool out too if all the flip-flops are separated from surrounding combo logic in this way.
Also, if your reset is active low (ie LOW resets ) it should be named as such, eg resetb or reset_n.
Your implementation produces quite a different output from the book's. You should prove this to yourself by constructing a simple testbench to drive your inputs and run a simulation. You will see that the book's output shifts the input data by a single clock cycle, whereas your output shifts the input data by eight clock cycles.
By the way you have indented your always block, I am led to believe that it is not what you wanted. This is how your block really behaves:
always #(posedge clk or negedge reset)
begin
if(!reset) begin
r_reg =0;
end else begin
r_reg[0]=data;
end
r_reg = r_reg<<1;
end
I always explicitly use the begin/end keywords in if/else statements to avoid this confusion.
The way it simulates, r_reg is always 0 because you clobber the 1st assignment (r_reg[0]=data;) with the 2nd (r_reg = r_reg<<1;). Another difference is that the book assigns data to the MSB of the shift register, but you assign it to the LSB.
If you are using decent linting and synthesis tools, you would probably get a bunch of warnings for your code. This would alert you to make some changes.