ghdl poll

Discussion in 'VHDL' started by antonio bergnoli, Dec 11, 2005.

  1. hi,
    how many people here use *ghdl* as simulator?
     
    antonio bergnoli, Dec 11, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mike Treseler, Dec 11, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. antonio bergnoli

    Phil Tomson Guest

    In article <439bf365$>,
    antonio bergnoli <> wrote:
    >hi,
    >how many people here use *ghdl* as simulator?


    I've used it. Mostly for academic stuff, though. Seems to be a pretty good
    simulator.

    Phil
     
    Phil Tomson, Dec 12, 2005
    #3
  4. I use ghdl for many time of my job. Of course i use another simulator
    (e.g modelsim) but I think it's time to promote ghdl as the first tool
    for simulation and verification. As I said some days ago, with ghdl, it
    is possible to recompile both altera and xilinx phisical libraries and
    then simulate post synthesis core.The author ( Tristan Gingold) is very
    careful to the feedback from users( bugs or suggestions).

    the website: http://ghdl.free.fr/
     
    antonio bergnoli, Dec 12, 2005
    #4
  5. antonio bergnoli

    Charles, NG Guest

    I find it a great tool as well. The true-to-spec support for the
    VHDL-language is a strong point.

    I've successfully used it on some medium size AMBA subsystems where the
    stimuli generator had a lot of horrible things like unconstrained types.
    At the time, the other low-cost simulators I tried all failed on that one.

    The VCD-dump in conjunction with a tool like gtkwave is good enough for
    most purposes. I haven't got around to trying the new patch for gtkwave
    with VHDL types yet.

    It is also my experience that Tristan Gingold (the author) is very
    responsive when problems crop up.

    Regards,
    Charles
     
    Charles, NG, Dec 12, 2005
    #5

  6. > I find it a great tool as well. The true-to-spec support for the
    > VHDL-language is a strong point.
    >
    > I've successfully used it on some medium size AMBA subsystems where the
    > stimuli generator had a lot of horrible things like unconstrained types.
    > At the time, the other low-cost simulators I tried all failed on that one.
    >
    > The VCD-dump in conjunction with a tool like gtkwave is good enough for
    > most purposes. I haven't got around to trying the new patch for gtkwave
    > with VHDL types yet.


    I also tried new wave format (ghw) and, apart of a bug (package wide
    signals) that led gtkwave to segfault, but now it's closed) it works
    very well.Now Gtkwave supports natively this new file format. The good
    news are that also the perfomances will be improved in the next release
    (0.21).

    >
    > It is also my experience that Tristan Gingold (the author) is very
    > responsive when problems crop up.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Charles
     
    antonio bergnoli, Dec 12, 2005
    #6
  7. Charles, NG ha scritto:
    > I find it a great tool as well. The true-to-spec support for the
    > VHDL-language is a strong point.
    >
    > I've successfully used it on some medium size AMBA subsystems where the
    > stimuli generator had a lot of horrible things like unconstrained types.
    > At the time, the other low-cost simulators I tried all failed on that one.
    >
    > The VCD-dump in conjunction with a tool like gtkwave is good enough for
    > most purposes. I haven't got around to trying the new patch for gtkwave
    > with VHDL types yet.

    I also tried new wave format (ghw) and, apart of a bug (package wide
    signals that led gtkwave to segfault, but now it's closed) it works
    very well.Now Gtkwave supports natively this new file format. The good
    news are that also the perfomances will be improved in the next release
    (0.21).



    >
    > It is also my experience that Tristan Gingold (the author) is very
    > responsive when problems crop up.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Charles
     
    antonio bergnoli, Dec 12, 2005
    #7
  8. antonio bergnoli

    Phil Tomson Guest

    In article <>,
    antonio bergnoli <> wrote:
    >I use ghdl for many time of my job. Of course i use another simulator
    >(e.g modelsim) but I think it's time to promote ghdl as the first tool
    >for simulation and verification. As I said some days ago, with ghdl, it
    >is possible to recompile both altera and xilinx phisical libraries and
    >then simulate post synthesis core.The author ( Tristan Gingold) is very
    >careful to the feedback from users( bugs or suggestions).


    Yes, I would also like to add that Tristan is quite responsive to questions.

    >
    >the website: http://ghdl.free.fr/



    Has anyone done any benchmarking of ghdl vs. various commercial VHDL
    simulators on a substantial design? I found ghdl's speed to be quite
    adequate for what I was doing, but I'm not sure how it compares to ModelSim
    for example.


    Also: has anyone else played around with writing C-extensions (foreign
    language models in C)? It's quite easy to do using ghdl since it is a gcc
    frontend. This I think is one of ghdl's great benefits. The open source
    nature of ghdl makes it possible to do a lot of things that are not possible
    with a closed-source simulator. For example, I was able to embed Ruby in
    a C extension so I could write models in
    Ruby - I had some parts of the design written in VHDL, other parts in C and
    still other parts in Ruby - I think that it should be possible to write testbenches
    in Ruby (or at least functions that can be called from the testbench) using
    this sort of setup with the advantage being that you can take
    advantage of all of Ruby's file manipulation, regular expression and
    networking capabilities (areas where VHDL is somewhat lacking ;-).

    Phil
     
    Phil Tomson, Dec 13, 2005
    #8
  9. Le Sun, 11 Dec 2005 10:37:41 +0100, antonio bergnoli a écrit :

    > hi,
    > how many people here use *ghdl* as simulator?


    I use it and I find it very good and usable (if speed is not your main
    concern).

    JCLL
     
    Jean-Christophe Le Lann, Dec 16, 2005
    #9

  10. > I also tried new wave format (ghw) and, apart of a bug (package wide
    > signals) that led gtkwave to segfault, but now it's closed) it
    > works very well.


    I encountered segfaults using ghw as well. Which versions of ghdl and
    gtkwave fixed your problem?

    BTW, count me in as a dedicated user of ghdl :) The project has made
    impressive progress during the last two years. The integration in the
    gcc suite enables instant line coverage reports using gcov.

    My experience is restricted to small sized projects (designs with up to
    3200 LEs plus RAM), but I am convinced that it has the potential to
    handle larger designs.


    Best regards

    Arnim
     
    Arnim Laeuger, Dec 18, 2005
    #10
  11. Today ghdl 0.21 is out; i'm already finished to compile xilinx Simprim
    an Unisim libraries i can put here makefiles if anyone is interested.

    Arnim Laeuger ha scritto:
    >
    >> I also tried new wave format (ghw) and, apart of a bug (package wide
    >> signals) that led gtkwave to segfault, but now it's closed) it
    >> works very well.

    >
    >
    > I encountered segfaults using ghw as well. Which versions of ghdl and
    > gtkwave fixed your problem?


    the last one;
    >
    > BTW, count me in as a dedicated user of ghdl :) The project has made
    > impressive progress during the last two years. The integration in the
    > gcc suite enables instant line coverage reports using gcov.


    I agree.
    >
    > My experience is restricted to small sized projects (designs with up to
    > 3200 LEs plus RAM), but I am convinced that it has the potential to
    > handle larger designs.
    >
    >
    > Best regards
    >
    > Arnim
     
    antonio bergnoli, Dec 19, 2005
    #11
  12. antonio bergnoli

    Phil Tomson Guest

    In article <>,
    antonio bergnoli <> wrote:
    >Today ghdl 0.21 is out;


    I see the following line in NEWS file for the 0.21 release:
    * simulation speed improved by 20% due to processes mngt optimizations.

    That's good news.

    >i'm already finished to compile xilinx Simprim
    >an Unisim libraries i can put here makefiles if anyone is interested.


    Yes, please post them (or better yet, put them on the web somewhere)

    ciao!

    Phil
     
    Phil Tomson, Dec 19, 2005
    #12
  13. antonio bergnoli

    Guest

    If users come across ghw segfaults on current versions of gtkwave,
    please don't just sit on them as support is new and there are probably
    simple things like null pointer exceptions or bogus memory free()
    conditions still lurking there. I don't use ghw at all myself so I
    can't verify any such problems.

    -t
     
    , Dec 20, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. John Williams

    GHDL for VHDL simulation?

    John Williams, Aug 8, 2003, in forum: VHDL
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,311
    John Williams
    Aug 8, 2003
  2. John Williams

    GHDL query

    John Williams, Aug 8, 2003, in forum: VHDL
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    3,570
    Felix Bertram
    Sep 4, 2003
  3. Tristan Gingold

    [ANN] GHDL 0.13 - a free VHDL simulator

    Tristan Gingold, Jun 26, 2004, in forum: VHDL
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    656
    Tristan Gingold
    Jun 26, 2004
  4. birdsong

    select.poll.poll() never blocks

    birdsong, Feb 12, 2009, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    455
    birdsong
    Feb 12, 2009
  5. Jean-Paul Calderone

    Re: select.poll.poll() never blocks

    Jean-Paul Calderone, Feb 12, 2009, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    445
    birdsong
    Feb 12, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page