I want to make a script, which can be executed from shell like:
./myscript -test1 or tclsh myscript.tcl -test1
I want it to open ModelSim, compile units, load a desired testbench, run simulation. Name of the test would be a parameter. I've already made macro files (.do) containing modelsim commands to compile & simulate desired units (+adding signals to waveform). I'm asking because scripting isn't my area of expertise.
So here's my questions:
How to ,,tell'' Modelsim (at startup) to do the commands in specified file?
Is TCL the language i'm looking for // is it doable in TCL? If so, which commands should i make familiar with?
Or maybe shell script is sufficient and i should look for specific Modelsim commands in reference manual?
Thanks for you time!
EDIT: Posting little example i've made for everyone to use. Usage: ./foo.tcl testname
#!/usr/bin/tclsh
# params
set testname [lindex $argv 0]
set testlist {test1 test2 test3}
# run vsim test $testname
if { [ lsearch $testlist $testname ] >= 0 } {
puts "Test found. Executing..."
open "|vsim -do $testname "
} else { puts "Test not found on the list!" }
You can launch vsim with arbitrary commands using the -do <arg> command line option. The argument can either be a filename of a .do file containing arbitrary Tcl code or a string of Tcl commands ("run -all; quit" is useful for non-interactive command line mode with -c).
Tcl is a full featured scripting language. It can handle any automation task you need to accomplish. Ultimately you cannot escape Tcl with Modelsim since almost everything runs through it internally. I would recommend you piece together what you need in a .do file and run that using the -do option.
If you create a .tcl script (.do files can run QuestaSim/ModelSim commands and tcl commands), you can do everything you want to do, include running other .do/.tcl files. For example:
ModelSim/QuestaSim Command Line:
just like what you are used to...
$: do MyDoFile.do
...instead use a Tcl file, which could call out your .do files:
$: source ./MyDirectory/MyTCLScript.tcl
Within that MyTCLScript.tcl you can have literally the following:
Within MyTCLScript.tcl:
...
#Use tabs for aliases
source ./MyDirectory/OtherDirectory/OtherTCLScript.tcl
MyAlias1
MyAlias2
do ./MyDoFile.do
...
Finally, to let you use commands to run single testbenches and the sort, I suggest looking at Tcl documentation on aliases. Here is an example though:
Within OtherTCLScript.tcl:
...
alias MyAlias1 {
eval <command><command flags>
}
alias MyAlias2 {
eval <command><command flags>
}
...
Sources:
1. Experience
2. Questa SIM User's Manual
Related
I'm using Ruby on Linux.
I'd like to test for the existence of a command on the Linux system.
I'd like to not get back the output of the command that I'm testing for.
I'd also like to not get back any output that results from the shell being unable to find the command.
I want to avoid using shell redirection from within the command that I send to the shell. So something like system("foo > /dev/null") would be unsuitable.
I'm ok with using redirection if there is a way to do it from Ruby.
The simplest thing would be just to use system. Let's say you're looking for ls.
irb(main):005:0> system("which ls")
/bin/ls
=> true
If that's off the table, you could peek into the directories in ENV["PATH"] for the executable you're looking for. ENV["PATH"].split(":") would give you an array of directory names to check for the desired command. If you find a file with the right name, you may want to ensure it's an executable.
I want to avoid using shell redirection from within the command that I
send to the shell. So something like system("foo > /dev/null") would
be unsuitable. I'm ok with using redirection if there is a way to do it from Ruby.
system("exec which cmd", out: "/dev/null")
puts "Command is available." if ($?).success?
The exec is to explicitly avoid unnecessary forking in the shell.
As a sidenote type -P can be used instead of which, but it relies on Bash and may have surprising effects if script is ported to an environment with a different default shell.
I want to execute a shell command in Rust. In Python I can do this:
import os
cmd = r'echo "test" >> ~/test.txt'
os.system(cmd)
But Rust only has std::process::Command. How can I execute a shell command like cd xxx && touch abc.txt?
Everybody is looking for:
use std::process::Command;
fn main() {
let output = Command::new("echo")
.arg("Hello world")
.output()
.expect("Failed to execute command");
assert_eq!(b"Hello world\n", output.stdout.as_slice());
}
For more information and examples, see the docs.
You wanted to simulate &&. std::process::Command has a status method that returns a Result<T> and Result implements and_then. You can use and_then like a && but in more safe Rust way :)
You should really avoid system. What it does depends on what shell is in use and what operating system you're on (your example almost certainly won't do what you expect on Windows).
If you really, desperately need to invoke some commands with a shell, you can do marginally better by just executing the shell directly (like using the -c switch for bash).
If, for some reason, the above isn't feasible and you can guarantee your program will only run on systems where the shell in question is available and users will not be running anything else...
...then you can just use the system call from libc just as you would from regular C. This counts as FFI, so you'll probably want to look at std::ffi::CStr.
For anyone looking for a way to set the current directory for the subprocess running the command i. e. run "ls" in some dir there's Command::current_dir. Usage:
use std::process::Command;
Command::new("ls")
.current_dir("/bin")
.spawn()
.expect("ls command failed to start");
There are a lot of tips (and warnings) on here for obfuscating various items within scripts.
I'm not trying to hide a password, I'm just wondering if I can obfuscate an actuall command within the script to defeat the casual user/grepper.
Background: We have a piece of software that helps manage machines within the environment. These machines are owned by the enterprise. The users sometimes get it in their heads that this computer is theirs and they don't want "The Man" looking over their shoulders.
I've developed a little something that will check to see if a certain process is running, and if not, clone it up and replace.
Again, the purpose of this is not to defeat anyone other than the casual user.
It was suggested that one could echo an octal value (the 'obfuscated' command) and use it as a variable within the script. e.g.:
strongBad=`echo "\0150\0157\0163\0164\0156\0141\0155\0145"`
I could then use $strongBad within the shell script to slyly call the commands that I wanted to call with arguments?
/bin/$strongBad -doThatThingYouDo -DoEEET
Is there any truth to this? So far it's worked via command line directly into shell (using the -e flag with echo) but not so much within the script. I'm getting unexpected output, perhaps the way I'm using it?
As a test, try this in the command line:
strongBad=`echo -e "\0167\0150\0157"`
And then
$strongBad
You should get the same output as "who".
EDIT
Upon further review, the addition of the path to the echo command in the variable is breaking it. Perhaps that's the source of my issue.
You can do a rotate 13 on any command you want hidden beforehand, then just have the the obfuscated command in the shell script.
This little bash script:
#!/bin/bash
function rot13 {
echo "$#" | tr '[a-m][n-z][A-M][N-Z]' '[n-z][a-m][N-Z][A-M]'
}
rot13 echo hello, world!
`rot13 rpub uryyb, jbeyq!`
Produces:
rpub uryyb, jbeyq!
hello, world!
I have a class with an instance method that runs RSpec using the %x[] notation:
class TestRunner
def run_rspec
# do stuff
%x[rspec spec -c -f documentation]
# do more stuff
end
end
When I do this:
> tr = TestRunner.new
> tr.run_rspec
The documentation (group and example names) does not appear in the console.
To contrast, when I run rspec straight from the command line I get this:
$ rspec spec -c -f documentation
a group name
an example
another example
...
I don't want to do this:
puts %x[rspec spec -c -f documentation
Because then the output all spits out in one huge clump at the very end. I want it to run in "real time," with each example showing up as each test is run.
Is there a way, with the setup I have, to get RSpec to announce what it's doing, as it's doing it (as it does when run normally from the command line)?
I've been advised that system() and the other shell methods can be dangerous to use, so I've opted to switch to the even-better approach of using RSpec itself:
RSpec::Core::Runner.run(['spec', '-c', '-f', 'documentation'])
rather than calling it via shell from my Ruby script.
Ruby offers several options for running programs from the command line. I was using %x[], the wrong choice for my use case.
Solution: Use system(), not %x[] -- rspec will write to STDOUT in real-time when I call it with system('rspec spec').
Some background in case it's helpful to anyone who stumbles upon this question:
Consider the differences between Ruby's command-line options:
%x[command] accumulates the result of command and returns it, in one chunk.
exec('command') will output command as command runs, but will replace whatever process called it -- i.e., if you use exec in your Ruby script, your Ruby script won't finish.
system('command') executes command in a subshell, and returns to the calling script.
This is why system was the choice for my script.
I have the following code, which is intended to run a java program on some input, and test that input against a results file for verification.
#!/bin/bash
java Program ../tests/test"$#".tst > test"$#".asm
spim -f test"$#".asm > temp
diff temp ../results/test"$#".out
The gist of the above code is to:
Run Program on a test file in another directory, and pipe the output into an assembly file.
Run a MIPS processor on that program's output, piping that into a file called temp.
Run diff on the output I generated and some expected output.
I made this shell script to help me automate checking of my homework assignment for class. I didn't feel like manually checking things anymore.
I must be doing something wrong, as although this program works with one argument, it fails with more than one. The output I get if I use the $# is:
./test.sh: line 2: test"$#".asm: ambiguous redirect
Cannot open file: `test0'
EDIT:
Ah, I figured it out. This code fixed the problem:
#!/bin/bash
for arg in $#
do
java Parser ../tests/test"$arg".tst > test"$arg".asm
spim -f test"$arg".asm > temp
diff temp ../results/test"$arg".out
done
It turns out that bash must have interpreted a different cmd arg for each time I was invoking $#.
enter code here
If you provide multiple command-line arguments, then clearly $# will expand to a list of multiple arguments, which means that all your commands will be nonsense.
What do you expect to happen for multiple arguments?