Vivado stops simulation on feedback circuit - vhdl

I'm trying to do a circuit consisting of a 2 to 1 multiplexer (8-bit buses), an 8-bit register and an 8-bit adder. These components are all tested and work as expected.
The thing is: if I try to send the output of the Adder to one of the inputs of the
multiplexer (as seen in the image by the discontinued line), the simulation will stop rather suddenly. If I don't do that and just let ain do its thing, everything will run just as it should, but I do need the output of the adder to be the one inputted to the multiplexer.
The simulation is the following:
The code is:
library IEEE;
use IEEE.STD_LOGIC_1164.ALL;
entity Sumitas is
port (m : in STD_LOGIC;
clk : in STD_LOGIC;
ain : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
Add : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0));
end Sumitas;
architecture rtl of Sumitas is
component Adder8bit
port (a, b : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
Cin : in STD_LOGIC;
S : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
Cout : out STD_LOGIC);
end component;
component GenericReg
generic (DataWidth : integer := 8);
port (en : in STD_LOGIC;
dataIn : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (DataWidth - 1 downto 0);
dataOut : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (DataWidth - 1 downto 0));
end component;
component GenericMux2_1
generic (DataWidth : integer := 8);
port (a, b : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (DataWidth - 1 downto 0);
Z : in STD_LOGIC;
S : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (DataWidth - 1 downto 0));
end component;
constant DW : integer := 8;
signal AddOut_s, MuxOut_s : STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
signal PCOut_s : STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
begin
m0 : GenericMux2_1
generic map (DataWidth => DW)
port map (a => "00000000",
b => AddOut_s,
Z => m,
S => MuxOut_s);
PC : GenericReg
generic map (DataWidth => DW)
port map (en => clk,
dataIn => MuxOut_s,
dataOut => PCOut_s);
Add0 : Adder8bit
port map (a => "00000001",
b => PCOut_s,
Cin => '0',
S => AddOut_s,
Cout => open);
Add <= AddOut_s;
end rtl;
and the testbench:
library IEEE;
use IEEE.STD_LOGIC_1164.ALL;
use IEEE.NUMERIC_STD.ALL;
entity bm_Sumitas is
end bm_Sumitas;
architecture benchmark of bm_Sumitas is
component Sumitas
port (m : in STD_LOGIC;
clk : in STD_LOGIC;
ain : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
Add : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0));
end component;
signal clk_s, m_s : STD_LOGIC;
signal Add_s, ain_s : STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
constant T : time := 2 ns;
begin
benchmark : Sumitas
port map (m => m_s,
clk => clk_s,
ain => ain_s,
Add => Add_s);
clk_proc: process
begin
clk_s <= '0';
wait for T/2;
clk_s <= '1';
wait for T/2;
end process;
bm_proc : process
begin
m_s <= '0';
wait for 10 ns;
m_s <= '1';
wait for 100 ns;
end process;
ains_proc : process
begin
ain_s <= "00001111";
for I in 0 to 250 loop
ain_s <= STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(TO_UNSIGNED(I, ain_s'length));
wait for T;
end loop;
end process;
end benchmark;
How can I do the thing I want? I'm ultimately trying to simulate a computer I designed. I have every component already designed and I'm coupling them together.

Constructing a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example requires filling in the missing components:
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity Adder8bit is
port (a, b : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
Cin : in STD_LOGIC;
S : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (7 downto 0);
Cout : out STD_LOGIC);
end entity;
architecture foo of adder8bit is
signal sum: std_logic_vector (9 downto 0);
use ieee.numeric_std.all;
begin
sum <= std_logic_vector ( unsigned ('0' & a & cin) +
unsigned ('0' & b & cin ));
s <= sum(8 downto 1);
cout <= sum(9);
end architecture;
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity GenericReg is
generic (DataWidth : integer := 8);
port (en : in STD_LOGIC;
dataIn : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (DataWidth - 1 downto 0);
dataOut : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (DataWidth - 1 downto 0));
end entity;
architecture fum of genericreg is
begin
dataout <= datain when en = '1';
end architecture;
with behavioral model substitutes.
(It's not that much work, copy the component declarations paste them, substitute entity for component and add the reserved word is, followed by simple behaviors in architectures.)
It reproduces the symptom you displayed in your simulation waveform:
You can see the essential point of failure occurs when the register enable (ms_s) goes high.
The simulator will report operation on it's STD_OUTPUT:
%: make wave
/usr/local/bin/ghdl -a bm_sumitas.vhdl
/usr/local/bin/ghdl -e bm_sumitas
/usr/local/bin/ghdl -r bm_sumitas --wave=bm_sumitas.ghw --stop-time=40ns
./bm_sumitas:info: simulation stopped #11ns by --stop-delta=5000
/usr/bin/open bm_sumitas.gtkw
%:
Note the simulation stopped at 11 ns because of a process executing repeatedly in delta cycles (simulation time doesn't advance).
This is caused by a gated relaxation oscillator formed by the enabled latch, delay (a delta cycle) and having at least one element of latch input inverting each delta cycle.
The particular simulator used has a delta cycle limitation, which will quit simulation when 5,000 delta cycles occur without simulation time advancing.
The genericreg kept generating events with no time delay in assignment, without an after clause in the waveform, after 0 fs (resolution limit) is assumed.
Essentially when the enable is true the signal will have at least one element change every simulation cycle due to the increment, and assigns the signal a new value for at least one element each simulation cycle without allowing the advancement of simulation time by not going quiescent.
You could note the simulator you used should have produced a 'console' output with a similar message if it were capable (and enabled).
So how it this problem cured? The easiest way is to use a register (not latch) sensitive to a clock edge:
architecture foo of genericreg is
begin
dataout <= datain when rising_edge(en);
end architecture;
Which gives us the full simulation:

Related

How to eliminate the logic gate and the adder

The logic gate in the RTL view was a latch previously. As an answer suggests, I assign each input with outputs. And the latch turns into a logic gate. I don't know whether it is a correct way to solve the problem. There is also an adder connected to the counter.
I want to eliminate the adder and the logic gate. (??? T^T).
What should I modify?
library ieee; use ieee.std_logic_1164.all; use ieee.std_logic_arith.all; use IEEE.std_logic_unsigned.all;
entity mux8x1 is port( input: in std_logic_vector( 7 downto 0); clk: in std_logic; --s: buffer std_logic; --rst : in std_logic; --d: buffer std_logic; q: out std_logic_vector (7 downto 0) --o: buffer std_logic_vector (3 downto 0) ); end mux8x1;
architecture mux of mux8x1 is signal count : std_logic_vector(3 downto 0);
--signal count_state: std_logic_vector (3 downto 0); signal serial: std_logic;
--shiftregister
signal internal: std_logic_vector (7 downto 0); signal d: std_logic;
begin --【The counter】 process(clk) --variable internal: std_logic_vector (7 downto 0); --variable d: std_logic; --variable initial: std_logic_vector (7 downto 0) :="01010101";
begin
if (clk'event and clk = '1') then
count <= count + 1;
end if;
end process;
--count_state <= count; --To divide the counter
--section1 for the counter --8x1 multiplxer combined with counter
process(count,input,clk) --variable serialin: std_logic; begin --serialin:='0'; if (count(3) <='0') then case count(2 downto 0) is --8 possible states for PToS
when "000"=> serial <=input(0);
when "001"=> serial <=input(1);
when "010"=> serial <=input(2);
when "011"=> serial <=input(3);
when "100"=> serial <=input(4);
when "101"=> serial <=input(5);
when "110"=> serial <=input(6);
when "111"=> serial <=input(7);
when others => serial <= '0'; end case; else serial <='0';
end if; --serial<=serialin; end process;
-- end if; end mux;
The following is the RTL viewer.
enter image description here
The reason that you get a latch, is because you do not apply a signal value to "serial" in any case when the process is started: Then "serial" keeps its old value which leads to a latch at synthesis, where this kept value is taken from.
So it is a good idea to assign a default value to any signal you assign values to in a process.
When you want to get a register (triggered by a clock edge) you must use a process which is only sensitive to a clock signal (and a reset signal) and uses as a condition "rising_edge(clk)". Of course you do not need a default assignment here.

VHDL-can't add numbers?

Hello I want to build a clock on my ALTERA DE2 that I can adjust the length of by pressing keys.
Now the problem is that when I convert from STD_LOGIC_VECTOR to UNSIGNED the code does not work:
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
use ieee.numeric_std.all;
--use ieee.std_logic_unsigned.all; Do not use with numeric_std
entity Adjust_Clock_4_buttens is
port(
clk,clk1 : in STD_LOGIC;
minutes_plus, minutes_minus,houres_plus,houres_minus : in STD_LOGIC;
minutes : IN STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(5 downto 0);
houres : IN STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(4 downto 0);
output_minutes : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(5 downto 0);
output_houres : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(4 downto 0);
LED_0 : OUT STD_LOGIC;
LED_1 : OUT STD_LOGIC;
LED_2 : OUT STD_LOGIC;
LED_3 : OUT STD_LOGIC
);
end entity Adjust_Clock_4_buttens ;
architecture behavioral of Adjust_Clock_4_buttens is
signal button1_r : std_logic_vector(2 downto 0);
signal button2_r : std_logic_vector(2 downto 0);
signal button3_r : std_logic_vector(2 downto 0);
signal button4_r : std_logic_vector(2 downto 0);
-- signal minutes_total : unsigned(5 downto 0) := (others => '0');
-- signal houres_total : unsigned(4 downto 0) := (others => '0');
signal minutes_total : unsigned(5 downto 0);
signal houres_total : unsigned(4 downto 0);
begin
process(clk)
begin
if (rising_edge(clk) )then
minutes_total<=unsigned(minutes);
houres_total<=unsigned(houres);
-- Shift the value of button in button_r
-- The LSB is unused and is there solely for metastability
button1_r <= button1_r(button1_r'left-1 downto 0) & minutes_plus;
button2_r <= button2_r(button2_r'left-1 downto 0) & minutes_minus;
button3_r <= button3_r(button3_r'left-1 downto 0) & houres_plus;
button4_r <= button4_r(button4_r'left-1 downto 0) & houres_minus;
if button1_r(button1_r'left downto button1_r'left-1) = "01" then -- Button1 rising --button1_r[2:1]
minutes_total <= (minutes_total + 1);
LED_0<='1';LED_1<='0';LED_2<='0';LED_3<='0';
elsif button2_r(button2_r'left downto button2_r'left-1) = "01" then -- Button2 rising --button1_r[2:1]
minutes_total <= (minutes_total-1 );
LED_0<='0';LED_1<='1';LED_2<='0';LED_3<='0';
end if;
if button3_r(button3_r'left downto button3_r'left-1) = "01" then -- Button1 rising --button1_r[2:1]
houres_total <= (houres_total + 1);
LED_0<='0';LED_1<='0';LED_2<='1';LED_3<='0';
elsif button4_r(button4_r'left downto button4_r'left-1) = "01" then -- Button2 rising --button1_r[2:1]
houres_total<= (houres_total-1 );
LED_0<='0';LED_1<='0';LED_2<='0';LED_3<='1';
end if;
end if;
end process;
output_minutes <= std_logic_vector(minutes_total);
output_houres <= std_logic_vector(houres_total);
end architecture behavioral ;
So in this code I get the time from another block the problem start when I try to add minutes and hours and for some reason it does not react to pressing of the keys. Could anyone explain maybe why is that?
The problem might be that you only have the clock in the sensitivity list of your process. Try adding the buttons in the sensitivity list, since they drive your if conditions. (Not sure if that's the problem but I guess it's worth a try)
minutes_total<=unsigned(minutes);
is on 2 lines, inside and outside of the process, which generates multiple line drivers, and will not work, ever!
(didn't read the rest of the code, there may be other problems, like hours not taking an e)
Now that it's inside the process, you need to rename minutes_total as minute_source, else you're incrementing the value only for the one clock cycle when you have a button edge!

Creating a 16-bit ALU from 16 1-bit ALUs (Structural code)

i have created the structural and the behavioral code for a 1-bit ALU,as well as a control circuit .The control circuit decides the operation that will be conducted between two variables : a,b .
Here is my behavioral part of the code :
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
package erotima2 is
-- AND2 declaration
component myAND2
port (outnotA,outnotB: in std_logic; outAND: out std_logic);
end component;
-- OR2 declaration
component myOR2
port (outnotA,outnotB: in std_logic; outOR: out std_logic);
end component;
-- XOR2 declaration
component myXOR2
port (outnotA,outnotB: in std_logic; outXOR: out std_logic);
end component;
--fulladder declaration
component fulladder
port(CarryIn,outnotA,outnotB: in std_logic; sum,CarryOut: out std_logic);
end component;
--Ainvert declaration
component notA
port(a: in std_logic; signala: std_logic_vector(0 downto 0); outnotA: out std_logic);
end component;
--Binvert declaration
component notB
port(b: in std_logic; signalb: std_logic_vector(0 downto 0); outnotB: out std_logic);
end component;
--ControlCircuit declaration--
component ControlCircuit
port (
opcode : in std_logic_vector (2 downto 0);
signala,signalb : out std_logic_vector(0 downto 0);
operation : out std_logic_vector (1 downto 0);
CarryIn: out std_logic);
end component;
--mux4to1 declaration
component mux4to1
port(outAND, outOR, sum, outXOR: in std_logic; operation: in std_logic_vector(1 downto 0); Result: out std_logic);
end component;
end package erotima2;
--2 input AND gate
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity myAND2 is
port (outnotA,outnotB: in std_logic; outAND: out std_logic);
end myAND2;
architecture model_conc of myAND2 is
begin
outAND<= outnotA and outnotB;
end model_conc;
-- 2 input OR gate
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity myOR2 is
port (outnotA,outnotB: in std_logic; outOR: out std_logic);
end myOR2;
architecture model_conc2 of myOR2 is
begin
outOR <= outnotA or outnotB;
end model_conc2;
--2 input XOR gate
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity myXOR2 is
port(outnotA,outnotB: in std_logic; outXOR: out std_logic);
end myXOR2;
architecture model_conc3 of myXOR2 is
begin
outXOR <= outnotA xor outnotB;
end model_conc3;
--3 input full adder
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity fulladder is
port(CarryIn,outnotA,outnotB: in std_logic; sum,CarryOut: out std_logic);
end fulladder;
architecture model_conc4 of fulladder is
begin
CarryOut <= (outnotB and CarryIn) or (outnotA and CarryIn) or (outnotA and outnotB);
sum <= (outnotA and not outnotB and not CarryIn) or (not outnotA and outnotB and not CarryIn) or (not outnotA and not outnotB and CarryIn) or (outnotA and outnotB and CarryIn);
end model_conc4;
--1 input notA
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity notA is
port(a: in std_logic; signala:std_logic_vector(0 downto 0); outnotA: out std_logic);
end notA;
architecture model_conc6 of notA is
begin
with signala select
outnotA <= a when "0",
not a when others;
end model_conc6;
--1 input notB
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity notB is
port(b: in std_logic; signalb: std_logic_vector(0 downto 0); outnotB: out std_logic);
end notB;
architecture model_conc5 of notB is
begin
with signalb select
outnotB <= b when "0",
not b when others;
end model_conc5;
--4 input MUX
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity mux4to1 is
port(outAND, outOR, sum, outXOR: in std_logic; operation: in std_logic_vector(1 downto 0); Result: out std_logic);
end mux4to1;
architecture model_conc7 of mux4to1 is
begin
with operation select
Result<= outAND when "00",
outOR when "01",
sum when "10",
outXOR when OTHERS;
end model_conc7 ;
The behavioral part defines the logic gates of AND,OR,XOR, a full adder for numerical addition and substraction. It also contains a 4-to-1 multiplexer that chooses (depending on the value of the "operation" variable) which operation the alu will do. Lastly there is a function that inverts the variables in order to be more efficient with our logic gate usage( using the DeMorgan theorem so we don't have to create a NOR gate). The control unit initializes the variable inputs, as well as the carryIn variable of the full adder, depending on the variable "opcode". A board with every possible combination
Next is the Control Circuit part of the code, which implements the previous board.
`
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
use ieee.numeric_std.all;
entity ControlCircuit is
port (
opcode :in std_logic_vector (2 downto 0);
signala, signalb : out std_logic_vector(0 downto 0);
operation : out std_logic_vector(1 downto 0);
CarryIn : out std_logic);
end ControlCircuit;
architecture model_conc9 of ControlCircuit is
--signal outAND,outOR,outXOR,sum,outnotA,outnotB : std_logic;
--signal operation : out std_logic_vector(1 downto 0);
begin
process(opcode)
begin
case opcode is
--AND--
when "000"=>
operation <= "00";
signala <= "0";
signalb <= "0";
CarryIn <= '0';
--OR--
when "001" =>
operation <= "01";
signala <= "0";
signalb <= "0";
CarryIn <= '0';
--ADD--
when "011" =>
operation <= "10";
signala <= "0";
signalb <= "0";
CarryIn <= '0';
--SUB--
when "010" =>
operation <= "10";
signala <= "0";
signalb <="1";
CarryIn <= '1';
--NOR--
when "101"=>
operation <= "00";
signala <= "1";
signalb <= "1";
CarryIn <= '0';
--xor
when "100" =>
operation <= "11";
signala <= "0";
signalb <= "0";
CarryIn <= '0';
--Adiafores times--
when others =>
operation <= "00";
signala <= "0";
signalb <= "0";
CarryIn <= '0';
end case;
end process;
end model_conc9;
`
Lastly here is the code that uses all the previous parts and and an RTL diagram that shows the code's result
library IEEE;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
use work.erotima2.all;
entity structural is
port (a,b: in std_logic;
opcode : in std_logic_vector ( 2 downto 0);
Result,CarryOut : out std_logic);
end structural;
architecture alu of structural is
signal outAND,outOR,outXOR,sum,outnotA,outnotB,CarryIn : std_logic;
signal signala,signalb : std_logic_vector (0 downto 0);
signal operation : std_logic_vector (1 downto 0);
begin
u0 : myAND2 port map (outnotA,outnotB,outAND);
u1 : myOR2 port map (outnotA,outnotB,outOR);
u2 : myXOR2 port map (outnotA,outnotB,outXOR);
u3 : fulladder port map (CarryIn,outnotA,outnotB,sum,CarryOut);
u4 : notA port map (a,signala,outnotA);
u5 : notB port map (b,signalb,outnotB);
u6 : mux4to1 port map (outAND, outOR,sum, outXOR, operation, Result );
u8 : ControlCircuit port map(opcode,signala,signalb,operation,CarryIn);
end alu;
Now for the tough part, i need to use the 1-bit ALU 16 times as a component, to create a 16-bit ALU. It is important to keep the control circuit independent from the rest of the code. I have tried using an std_logic_vector ( 15 downto 0) but it did not work and i would like to use the previous code segments as a component. Can anyone give any tips or ideas that will help connect 16 1-bit ALUs to a complete 16-bit ALU? Thanks in advance for those who read this massive wall of text.
Your recent comment
Yes i understand that my code is weird but we were intsructed to invert the inputs according to this diagram . As for the duplicate post, i checked before posting and they were implemented only structurally, while in my case i need to write the behavioral part too.
Explains the issue, misspellings aside. You'll notice your architecture structural of entity structural doesn't match the signals shown on the above 1 bit alu diagram which doesn't contain an instantiated ControlCircuit.
If you were to provide a design unit that matched the above diagram you can hook up the 1 bit alu carry chain while deriving the carryin for the lsb from the control block which provides a + 1 and inversion for subtraction:
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity alu_16_bit is
port (
a: in std_logic_vector (15 downto 0);
b: in std_logic_vector (15 downto 0);
opcode: in std_logic_vector (2 downto 0);
result: out std_logic_vector (15 downto 0);
carryout: out std_logic
);
end entity;
architecture foo of alu_16_bit is
component alu_1_bit is
port (
a: in std_logic;
b: in std_logic;
ainvert: in std_logic;
binvert: in std_logic;
carryin: in std_logic;
operation: in std_logic_vector (1 downto 0);
result: out std_logic;
carryout: out std_logic
);
end component;
component controlcircuit is
port (
opcode: in std_logic_vector(2 downto 0);
ainvert: out std_logic;
binvert: out std_logic;
operation: out std_logic_vector(1 downto 0);
carryin: out std_logic -- invert a or b, add + 1 for subtract
);
end component;
signal ainvert: std_logic;
signal binvert: std_logic;
signal operation: std_logic_vector (1 downto 0);
signal carry: std_logic_vector (16 downto 0);
begin
CONTROL_CIRCUIT:
controlcircuit
port map (
opcode => opcode,
ainvert => ainvert,
binvert => binvert,
operation => operation,
carryin => carry(0) -- for + 1 durring subtract
);
GEN_ALU:
for i in 0 to 15 generate
ALU:
alu_1_bit
port map (
a => a(i),
b => b(i),
ainvert => ainvert,
binvert => binvert,
carryin => carry(i),
operation => operation,
result => result(i),
carryout => carry(i + 1)
);
end generate;
carryout <= carry(16) when operation = "10" else '0';
end architecture;
This represents moving ControlCircuit out of structural - only one copy is needed, renaming structural alu_1_bit and making the ports match.
There's a new top level alu_16_bit containing a single instance of ControlCircuit along with sixteen instances of alu_1_bit elaborated from the generate statement using the generate parameter i to index into arrays values for connections.
This design has been behaviorally implemented independently using the Opcode table you provided the link to:
as well as an independent fulladder used in alu_1_bit and appears functional.
This implies your design units haven't been validated.

VHDL Filter not getting output for first values

I tried implementing a fir filter in VHDL but during the first three clocks I get no output and the error at 0 ps, Instance /filter_tb/uut/ : Warning: There is an 'U'|'X'|'W'|'Z'|'-' in an arithmetic operand, the result will be 'X'(es)..
Source file (I also have 2 other files for D Flip-Flops):
library IEEE;
use IEEE.STD_LOGIC_1164.ALL;
use ieee.std_logic_unsigned.all;
entity filter is
port ( x: in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(3 downto 0);
clk: in STD_LOGIC;
y: out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(9 downto 0));
end filter;
architecture struct of filter is
type array1 is array (0 to 3) of STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(3 downto 0);
signal coef : array1 :=( "0001", "0011", "0010", "0001");
signal c0, c1, c2, c3: STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(7 downto 0):="00000000";
signal s0, s1, s2, s3: STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(3 downto 0) :="0000";
signal sum: STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(9 downto 0):="0000000000";
component DFF is
Port ( d : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(3 downto 0);
clk : in STD_LOGIC;
q : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(3 downto 0));
end component;
component lDFF is
Port ( d : in STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(9 downto 0);
clk : in STD_LOGIC;
q : out STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(9 downto 0));
end component;
begin
s0<=x;
c0<=x*coef(0);
DFF1: DFF port map(s0,clk,s1);
c1<=s1*coef(1);
DFF2: DFF port map(s1,clk,s2);
c2<=s2*coef(2);
DFF3: DFF port map(s2,clk,s3);
c3<=s3*coef(3);
sum<=("00" & c0+c1+c2+c3);
lDFF1: lDFF port map(sum,clk,y);
end struct;
Testbench:
LIBRARY ieee;
USE ieee.std_logic_1164.ALL;
-- Uncomment the following library declaration if using
-- arithmetic functions with Signed or Unsigned values
use ieee.std_logic_unsigned.all;
ENTITY filter_tb IS
END filter_tb;
ARCHITECTURE behavior OF filter_tb IS
-- Component Declaration for the Unit Under Test (UUT)
COMPONENT filter
PORT(
x : IN STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(3 downto 0);
clk : IN std_logic;
y : OUT STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(9 downto 0)
);
END COMPONENT;
--Inputs
signal x : STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(3 downto 0) := (others => '0');
signal clk : std_logic := '0';
--Outputs
signal y : STD_LOGIC_VECTOR(9 downto 0);
-- Clock period definitions
constant clk_period : time := 10 ns;
BEGIN
-- Instantiate the Unit Under Test (UUT)
uut: filter PORT MAP (
x => x,
clk => clk,
y => y
);
-- Clock process definitions
clk_process :process
begin
clk <= '0';
wait for clk_period/2;
clk <= '1';
wait for clk_period/2;
end process;
-- Stimulus process
stim_proc1: process
begin
x<="0001";
wait for 10ns;
x<="0011";
wait for 10ns;
x<="0010";
wait for 10ns;
--x<="0011";
end process;
END;
Output:
If anyonce could help, I'd appreciate it. I think it has something to do with the inital values of the signals c_i and s_i but I'm not too sure.
Your FIR filter contains flip-flops. These flip-flops have no reset input and so power up in an unknown state. You simulator models this by initialising the flip-flops' outputs to "UUUU" (as the are four bits wide). A 'U' std_logic value represents and uninitialised value.
So, your code behaves as you ought to expect. If you're not happy with that behaviour, you need to add a reset input and connect it to your flip-flops.
You have build a series of three register making up a cascade of registers.
You have not provided a reset so the register contents will be Unknown. You use the registers for calculations without any condition. Thus you arithmetic calculations will see the Unknown values and fail as you have seen.
The first (simplest) solution would be to add a reset. But that is not the best solution. You will no longer get warnings but the first three cycles of your output will be based on the register reset value not of your input signal.
If you have a big stream and don't care about some incorrect values in the first clock cycle you can live with that.
The really correct way would be to have a 'valid' signal transported along side your data. You only present the output data when there is a 'valid'. This is the standard method to process data through any pipeline hardware structure.
By the way: you normally do not build D-ffs yourself. The synthesizer will do that for you. You just use a clocked process and process the data vectors in it.
I have some questions. If I add a reset pin, when will I toggle it from 1 to 0? How can I create this circuit without explicitly using D-ffs?
You make a reset signal in the same way as you make your clock.
As to D-registers: they come out if you use the standard register VHDL code:
reg : process (clk,reset_n)
begin
// a-synchronous active low reset
if (reset_n='0') then
s0 <= "0000";
s1 <= "0000";
s2 <= "0000";
elsif (rising_edge(clk)) then
s0 <= x;
s1 <= s0;
s2 <= s1;
....
(Code entered as-is, not checked for syntax or typing errors)

VHDL Moving average: simulation & synthesis result differ (Vivado)

For my project I need to reduce a noise of an ADC output and implemented a simple moving average filter in VHDL.
Although it works in simulation (see the picture):
it has some strange behavior if I display it on the chipscope when the system is running in FPGA (see the picture):
The VHDL code I use for the moving average is as follows:
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
use ieee.math_real.all;
use ieee.numeric_std.all;
entity moving_avg is
generic(
SAMPLES_COUNT : integer := 32
);
port (
clk_i : in std_logic;
rst_n_i : in std_logic;
sample_i : in std_logic_vector(11 downto 0);
avg_o : out std_logic_vector(11 downto 0)
);
end;
architecture rtl of moving_avg is
type sample_buff_t is array (1 to SAMPLES_COUNT) of std_logic_vector(11 downto 0);
signal sample_buffer : sample_buff_t;
signal sum : std_logic_vector(31 downto 0);
constant wid_shift : integer := integer(ceil(log2(real(SAMPLES_COUNT))));
signal avg_interm_s : std_logic_vector(31 downto 0);
begin
process (clk_i, rst_n_i) begin
if rst_n_i='1' then
sample_buffer <= (others => sample_i);
sum <= std_logic_vector(unsigned(resize(unsigned(sample_i), sum'length)) sll wid_shift) ;
elsif rising_edge(clk_i) then
sample_buffer <= sample_i & sample_buffer(1 to SAMPLES_COUNT-1);
sum <= std_logic_vector(unsigned(sum) + unsigned(sample_i) - unsigned(sample_buffer(SAMPLES_COUNT)));
end if;
end process;
avg_interm_s <= std_logic_vector((unsigned(sum) srl wid_shift));
avg_o <= avg_interm_s(11 downto 0);
end;
I use Xilinx Vivado tool 2015.2 running on Ubuntu 14.04 x64.
Could you please help me to identify the problem, such
that results in simulation correspond to results after synthesis?

Resources