This is out of production code. It compiled just fine. I didn't try
to write a testbench to see how it simulates. I am not posting the
actual code, of course. I can't do that. I'll review it again
tonight and see if I made a mistake somewhere. The indeces come from
generic declarations at the top of the module. In doing the math I
get the indeces as posted...which made no sense to me.
The story with Generics is not allways obvious. Maybe you just missed
to use the intended configuration (or instantiation) that sets the
Generics to reasonable values. It might be happen, that a module is
not working with default values seen in entity, but working with the
values used in the final design via configurations or instatiations. I
consider this as bad coding style, but you never know....
I'm just using an IP that seems to be used in a real lot of designs
around the world that has not fully constraint sensitivity lists for
combinatorial processes inside. A good synthesis tool throws a handful
of warnings and I really wonder if our company is the first to look at
warnings or just paid to less to get the correct release of the IP.
bye Thomas