Suppose I have defined a record with fields of std_ulogic_vector to represent a larger std_ulogic_vector. It's straightforward to convert this record to the large vector using a concatenation (without knowledge of the size for each field).
How do I do the reverse, e.g. convert the large std_ulogic_vector back to the record ?
Example :
architecture RTL of record_conversion is
type data_t is record
top : std_ulogic_vector(4 downto 0);
bottom : std_ulogic_vector(2 downto 0);
end record data_t;
signal record_s : data_t;
signal vector_s : std_ulogic_vector(7 downto 0);
begin
-- vector to record works
--vector_s <= record_s.top & record_s.bottom;
-- record to vector does not work
(record_s.top, record_s.bottom) <= vector_s;
-- tedious solution with knowledge of the field size
record_s.top <= vector_s(7 downto 3);
record_s.bottom <= vector_s(2 downto 0);
end architecture;
It is usually a good idea to wrap such conversion in functions, and with a subtype for resulting vector, like:
...
constant LEN : integer := 8; -- Number of bits in data_t
type data_t is record
top : std_ulogic_vector(4 downto 0);
bottom : std_ulogic_vector(2 downto 0);
end record data_t;
subtype vector_t is std_ulogic_vector(LEN - 1 downto 0);
function data_to_vector(data : data_t) return std_ulogic_vector is
variable res_v : vector_t;
begin
res_v := data.top & data.bottom;
return res_v;
end function;
function vector_to_data(vector : vector_t) return data_t is
variable res_v : data_t;
begin
res_v.top := vector(LEN - 1 downto LEN - res_v.top'length);
res_v.bottom := vector(res_v.bottom'length - 1 downto 0);
return res_v;
end function;
signal record_s : data_t;
signal vector_s : vector_t;
begin
record_s <= vector_to_data(vector_s);
vector_s <= data_to_vector(record_s);
...
Maybe another constant should be added to define the split between top and bottom.
There are a couple of other methods besides using subprogram calls to assign elements of one type to elements of another type.
You can use a qualified expression:
record_s <= data_t'(vector_s(7 downto 3), vector_s (2 downto 0));
Where the aggregate comprised of two slices of vector_s with an explicit type matching the record. See IEEE Std 1076-2008 9.3.6 Qualified expressions.
During simulation new values for signals are validated. See 14.7.3.4 Signal update:
b) If S is a composite signal (including a slice of an array), the effective value of S is implicitly converted to the subtype of S. The subtype conversion checks that for each element of S there is a matching element in the effective value and vice versa. An error occurs if this check fails. The result of this subtype conversion is then assigned to the variable representing the current value of S.
Besides having a matching element (subelement,...) subtype conversion changes the index ranges to match the target.
You can specify the slice index ranges with subtype index ranges:
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity record_conversion is
end entity;
architecture subtypes of record_conversion is
type data_t is record
top : std_ulogic_vector(4 downto 0);
bottom : std_ulogic_vector(2 downto 0);
end record data_t;
signal record_s : data_t;
signal vector_s : std_ulogic_vector(7 downto 0);
subtype t is std_logic_vector (
vector_s'LEFT downto vector_s'LEFT - record_s.top'length + 1
);
subtype b is std_logic_vector (
vector_s'LEFT - record_s.top'length downto 0
);
begin
record_s <= data_t'(vector_s(t'range), vector_s(b'range));
end architecture;
Here the subtypes index range slices of the right hand side expression elements.
You can describe the slices with aliases:
architecture aliases of record_conversion is
type data_t is record
top: std_ulogic_vector(4 downto 0);
bottom: std_ulogic_vector(2 downto 0);
end record data_t;
signal record_s: data_t;
signal vector_s: std_ulogic_vector(7 downto 0);
alias vector_s_top: std_ulogic_vector(record_s.top'range) is
vector_s(7 downto 3);
alias vector_s_bottom: std_ulogic_vector(record_s.bottom'range) is
vector_s (2 downto 0);
begin
record_s <= data_t'(vector_s_top, vector_s_bottom);
end architecture;
Here the two aliases describe fields of vector_s. If you were guaranteed to always assign the record composite object you could actually do away with records and simply use aliases. The closest VHDL comes to unions.
The above examples analyze, elaborate and simulate without error, demonstrating there are no slice boundary issues.
Qualified expressions, subtype declarations and aliases incur no additional simulation overhead while subprogram calls do.
Related
I have a signal dataIn : std_logic_vector ( 15 downto 0);
I want to give an input less than 16-bits for example dataIn <= x"000a" and those bits occupy the most significant bits and the rest to be zero.
In verilog you can do that very easy but in VHDL you get the error:
"string length does not match that of the anonymous integer subtype defined t... ".
I know that if you use 16x"bit_string" solves the problem but this is only for VHDL-2008 and ghdl doesn't support yet VHDL-2008.
Are there any method for IEEE Std 1076-2002?
For VHDL-87/93/2002 you could use the resize function from the numeric_std package.
library ieee;
use ieee.numeric_std.all;
...
constant FOO : std_logic_vector(2 downto 0) := "010";
signal dataIn : std_logic_vector(15 downto 0) := std_logic_vector(resize(unsigned(FOO), 16));
Note that the resize function is only defined for types signed and unsigned.
If you want the short bit string to be placed into the MSBs you may need to use the 'reverse_order attribute.
Often you will find it easier to define a dedicated function which encapsulates more complicated initializations.
constant FOO : std_logic_vector(2 downto 0) := "010";
function init_dataIn (bar : std_logic_vector; len : integer) return std_logic_vector is
begin
return bar & (len - bar'length - 1 downto 0 => '0');
end function init_dataIn;
signal dataIn : std_logic_vector(15 downto 0) := init_dataIn(FOO, 16);
I want to have a loop that runs the all lines of my code and also that runs every position of all lines.
My problem is in selecting the line that the loop will run, and I want to have simple way to do it without making to write every single line one-by-one, cause the final code will have 66 lines to scan.
Hope you can help me.
Entity of this code will have 66 lines, but I'm just testing it this 10 lines right now:
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
use ieee.numeric_std.all;
entity lshift is
port( RED_Buffer1 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
RED_Buffer2 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
RED_Buffer3 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
RED_Buffer4 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
RED_Buffer5 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
IR_Buffer1 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
IR_Buffer2 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
IR_Buffer3 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
IR_Buffer4 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
IR_Buffer5 : in std_logic_vector(6 downto 0);
output : out bit_vector(1 downto 0));
end lshift;
What I have done so far but with no success:
ARCHITECTURE main OF lshift IS
SIGNAL condition1: boolean;
signal valor : std_ulogic;
BEGIN
PROCESS(IR_Buffer5)
BEGIN
FOR I IN 1 TO 5 LOOP
FOR J IN 1 TO 5 LOOP
CONSTANT linha_cond : string(1 to 12) := string(("RED_Buffer") && I);
IF (linha_cond(J) = '1') THEN
output <= "01";
END IF;
END LOOP;
END LOOP;
END PROCESS;
END main;
The purpose of this answer is to demonstrate indexing the subelement values of RED_Buffer1 through RED_Buffer5. Without the purpose of the code being revealed this could easily prove to be an XY Problem question.
While it is possible to organize RED_Buffer1 through RED_Buffer5 into a value that can be indexed as shown below, there are other issues as well.
library ieee;
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
entity lshift is
port (
red_buffer1: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
red_buffer2: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
red_buffer3: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
red_buffer4: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
red_buffer5: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
ir_buffer1: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
ir_buffer2: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
ir_buffer3: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
ir_buffer4: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
ir_buffer5: in std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
output: out bit_vector (1 downto 0)
);
end entity lshift;
architecture indexed_array of lshift is
signal condition1: boolean;
signal valor: std_ulogic;
type lbuffer is array (1 to 5) of std_logic_vector (6 downto 0);
signal red_buffer: lbuffer;
begin
red_buffer <= (red_buffer1, red_buffer2, red_buffer3, red_buffer4,
red_buffer5);
process (red_buffer)
begin
for i in 1 to 5 loop
for j in red_buffer'range loop
if red_buffer(i)(j) = '1' then
output <= "01";
end if;
end loop;
end loop;
end process;
end architecture indexed_array;
How the indexing is implemented here
A composite type (lbuffer) having the requisite number of elements with required element subtype is declared. This is possible because the declarations for ports RED_Buffer1 through RED_Buffer5 share a common subtype indication. Assignment to elements of an object of the type lbuffer would be compatible, having matching elements between the target and right hand expression.
A signal red_buffer with a type mark of lbuffer is declared.
A concurrent assignment was made to the signal in a concurrent signal assignment statement in the architecture statement part from an aggregate. The association in the aggregate is positional. It could as easily use named association:
-- red_buffer <= (red_buffer1, red_buffer2, red_buffer3, red_buffer4,
-- red_buffer5);
red_buffer <= (1 => red_buffer1, 2 => red_buffer2, 3 => red_buffer3,
4 => red_buffer4, 5 => red_buffer5);
The type of the aggregate is taken from context, here the assignment statement where red_buffer has the subtype lbuffer.
A selected element of the composite red_buffer is selected by an index name (red_buffer(i)). A subelement of red_buffer(i) is selected by use of an indexed name where the name red_buffer(i) where 'iis a constant using 'j from the inner loop - red_buffer(i)(j).
Note the range of the j parameter doesn't match the index range of subtype of the lbuffer element subtype here identical to the subtype of RED_Buffer1 through RED_Buffer5. This signifies a further potential semantic issue with the original code, whose purpose isn't made clear here. The only hint present in the original code comes from linha_cond where linha means line in Portuguese or Catalan indicating j is used to index within a 'line'.
The original code fails for two reasons
First an object can't be declared inline in VHDL. The for loop parameter is dynamically elaborated from an implicit declaration, the loop parameter is only visible within the loop statement's sequence of statements. The syntax doesn't allow for additional object declarations.
Second a name for a object declaration is conveyed in an identifier list consisting of one or more identifiers which are lexical elements (lexemes) that cannot be manipulated programmatically.
Other semantic issues with the question's code
The assignment to output without the passage of time doesn't appear useful.
A process statement is an independently executing concurrent statement wherein the loop statement containing an assignment to the same signal output will overwrite the projected output waveform for elements of output without any intervening passage of time.
There's only one entry in a projected output waveform queue for any particular simulation time. A simulation cycle consists of signal updates followed by the resumption and subsequent suspension of any processes sensitive to signal updates. The purpose is to emulate parallelism in hardware while describing behavior with sequential statements.
Here that would mean output would be updated to the value "01" if any of the if statement conditions in the unrolled loops evaluate to TRUE. That's likely not the intended behavior (without more information from the original poster).
Also note there is no output assignment to a different value and no default or otherwise assigned value. For synthesis this would represent a hold over delay on output until a '1' is first found.
In both cases this refers to an implicit latch for output.
This issue with the sample code can't be addressed without knowing how it is supposed to work and the only hint that has been shown here on Stackoverflow to date is by a question deleted by the user requiring 10K+ reputation to access (others will see aPage not found message, see revision 1).
Also concepts conveyed from programming or scripting languages don't generally port to Hardware Description Languages which are generally formal notations defined self-referentially (here in IEEE Std 1076, the VHDL Language Reference Manual) requiring inculcation or persistent effort to learn. HDLs generally describe hardware behaviorally and structurally not by programmatic equivalence.
I'm creating a package with some functions I often use and some functions need to take slices of their parameters. I usually use downto direction for all my signals, but sometimes signals change their direction unexpectedly, e.g., appending a zero bit (sig & '0') seems to change the direction to positive.
Is there a way to slice arrays (std_logic_vector, unsigned, signed) independent of their direction? For example how would you implement a function taking the lowest two bits? The only implementation I came up with uses an additional constant with the expected direction:
function take_two(x : std_logic_vector) return std_logic_vector is
constant cx : std_logic_vector(x'length-1 downto 0) := x;
begin
return cx(1 downto 0);
end function;
I've also tried something like x(x'low+1 downto x'low) but Quartus doesn't like this.
The question is actually not on the input, but on the required output. What do you prefer?
If you look at how functions are implemented in for instance std_logic_1164-body.vhdl, your function would similarly be something like (in a complete example):
entity e is end entity;
library ieee;
architecture a of e is
use ieee.std_logic_1164.all;
signal test : std_logic_vector(7 downto 0) := "10010110";
signal output : std_logic_vector(2 downto 0);
function slice(s: STD_LOGIC_VECTOR; u, l : natural) return STD_LOGIC_VECTOR is
alias sv : STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (s'length-1 downto 0) is s;
variable result : STD_LOGIC_VECTOR (u downto l);
begin
for i in result'range loop
result(i) := sv(i);
end loop;
return result;
end function;
begin
output <= slice(test & '0', 5, 3); -- test becomes 'to' range.
-- output still becomes "101"
end architecture;
type matrixsignal is array (LEVELS downto 0) of std_logic_vector(NBIT-1 downto 0);
signal p_matrix, g_matrix: matrixsignal;
signal col_temp_g, col_temp_p : std_logic_vector(LEVELS downto 0);
...
col_temp_p<=p_matrix(LEVELS downto 0)(j-1);
col_temp_g<=g_matrix(LEVELS downto 0)(j-1);
Hello everyone!
I want to select and copy the entire column (j-1) of the 2 arrays...but the compiler tells me that this way is not the correct one.
How is it possible to do it?
P.S. LEVELS,NBIT,j are initialized parameters...I did not report their initialization.
You should define matrixsignal as a 2-dimensional array instead of a one-dimensional array that nests another 1-dimensional array.
type matrixsignal is array(LEVELS downto 0, NBIT - 1 downto 0) of std_logic;
The PoC-Library offers that type as T_SLM (std_logic_matrix) together lot's of manipulation functions and procedures in package PoC.vectors. E.g. PoC defines a get_col function like this:
function get_col(slm : T_SLM; ColIndex : natural) return std_logic_vector is
variable slv : std_logic_vector(slm'range(1));
begin
for i in slm'range(1) loop
slv(i) := slm(i, ColIndex);
end loop;
return slv;
end function;
Usage:
subtype matrixsignal is T_SLM(LEVELS downto 0, NBIT - 1 downto 0);
signal p_matrix, g_matrix : matrixsignal;
signal col_temp_g, col_temp_p : std_logic_vector(LEVELS downto 0);
...
col_temp_p <= get_col(p_matrix, j - 1);
col_temp_g <= get_col(g_matrix, j - 1);
The package PoC.vectors can be synthesized.
Further functions are provided like:
slicing a complete row
slicing sub matrixes
flattening / serialization
creating matrix from vector / deserialization
overloaded boolean operators
row / column assignment
matrix merging
conversion to/from 1-dimensional array types containing another 1-dimensional array type
...
I have created a two dimensional array.
type dataout is array (12 downto 0, 12 downto 0) of std_logic_vector(7 downto 0);
signal a : dataout;
The values are passing through the array and operation like addition and subtraction are also performing but i am not getting the way to pass this value of array to pass through another signal or output port.
Suggest me how to pass these values to another array, signal and output port.
Simply create an output port of type dataout and assign a to it.
To do this, the declaration of dataout must be in a package
package my_types is
type dataout is array (12 downto 0, 12 downto 0) of std_logic_vector(7 downto 0);
end package my_types;
which you use both in this entity/arch and any outer layer that instantiates it.
use work.my_types.all;
entity test is
port(
clock : in std_logic;
a_out : out dataout
);
end test;
architecture t of test is
signal a : dataout;
begin
a_out <= a;
end t;