Sign in

username:

password:



Not a member?

Search Comp.Arch.FPGA



Search tips

fpga by Keywords

Altera | ASIC | CPLD | Cyclone | DCM | DDR | DSP | Ethernet | ISE | JTAG | Linux | LVDS | Microblaze | ML310 | Modelsim | NIOS | OPB | PCI | Quartus | RocketIO | SDRAM | Spartan | Spartan3 | SRAM | Stratix | Verilog | VHDL | Virtex | Virtex-4 | Virtex-II | Xilinx | XST

Ads

See Also

DSPEmbedded SystemsElectronics

Comp.Arch.FPGA | ISE Design Suite 11 will not evaluate 2's comp

There are 2 messages in this thread.

You are currently looking at messages 0 to 2.

ISE Design Suite 11 will not evaluate 2's comp - shannon - 2010-06-03 13:47:00

If anyone out there uses Xilinx ISE Design Suite
11, I need your help!!

According to this information 
[link]http://www.fpgarelated.com/usenet/fpga/show/662-1.php[/link]
ISE 11 should be running verilog 2001, however when I try to run thearithmetic shift ">>>" it does not populate 1's for negative numbers as
itshould.

Does anyone have any advice on how to correct this problem?

	   
					
---------------------------------------		
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com



Re: ISE Design Suite 11 will not evaluate 2's comp - Jonathan Bromley - 2010-06-03 16:38:00

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 12:47:14 -0500,
"shannon"
<sesilver@n_o_s_p_a_m.gmail.com> wrote:

>If anyone out there uses Xilinx ISE Design Suite 11, I need your help!!
>
>According to this information 
>[link]http://www.fpgarelated.com/usenet/fpga/show/662-1.php[/link]
>ISE 11 should be running verilog 2001, however when I try to run the
>arithmetic shift ">>>" it does not populate 1's for negative
numbers as it
>should.
>
>Does anyone have any advice on how to correct this problem?

Yup.

1) Try the code in a reputable simulator.  If the simulator 
gives sign extension and Xilinx doesn't, report the bug to 
Xilinx.

2) Assuming (much the most likely scenario) that you 
did (1) and discovered that the simulator, too, did
an unsigned right shift, blush temporarily and then
recognise that signed arithmetic in Verilog-2001 is
not to be taken lightly.  It is full of obscure and 
counter-intuitive traps, and you wouldn't be the first
person to fall headlong into them.

Read my post in

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.verilog/browse_thread/thread/549b3d83f7e1fb11/
for much more detail.

After reading that stuff, come back here with the
*exact* code (including declarations) if you
still think the tool is at fault.
-- 
Jonathan Bromley