The matchstiq doesn't really have the proper device-specific constraints
implemented anywhere, and relies on the same .xdc file for all of its pf
configs. Either the E310 or the Zedboard/FMCOMMS is the closest to what
you're looking for - each has a platform config which references a
constraints file:
https://github.com/opencpi/opencpi/tree/master/projects/assets/hdl/platforms/zed
And yes, leaving the platform='' gets rid of the signal in the top level.
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 2:39 PM Brian Padalino <bpadalino_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 2:29 PM Davis Hoover <dhoover_at_geontech.com> wrote:
>
>> Some more background info if it helps:
>>
>> When you build from a hdl/platform/<foo> directory, it builds the platform
>> worker and all platform configs. For Vivado the worker and configs are
>> built as .edfs. A platform config can (and should, if device workers are
>> instantiated, in order to keep the device worker and its constraints
>> "together") reference a constraints file.
>>
>
> I am trying to use the matchstiq_z1 as a reference in the github repo here:
>
>
> https://github.com/opencpi/opencpi/tree/master/projects/assets/hdl/platforms/matchstiq_z1
>
> And I am failing to see if the XDC files are associated with any of the
> platform configs there? I don't think I see it?
>
> How can I explicitly have an HdlConfig reference the constraints?
>
>
>>
>> Then you build from a hdl/assemblies/<my_assembly> directory. An assembly
>> is built, again as an .edf if Vivado is used. Then a container is built,
>> which is synonymous with the top-level HDL design. Unless the assembly
>> makefile overrides the default, a default container is built which uses
>> the
>> base config. A custom container can also be built, which can instantiate
>> device workers directly, and/or it can reference a platform config. A
>> container can also have a constraints file (or it can simply point to a
>> platform config which may already have its own constraints file)
>>
>> So the FSK assembly uses custom containers, each of which follow the
>> platform-config-containing-constraints-and-device-workers paradigm. For
>> Vivado this yields a hierarchy of:
>> * container/bitstream
>> * assembly .edf
>> * application worker .edf
>> * application worker .edf
>> * ...
>> * platform config .edf (w/ constraints file)
>> * device worker .edf
>> * device worker .edf
>> * ...
>>
>>
> This is exactly what I needed to see. Thank you!
>
> Also, just to be sure, leaving the platform='' should get rid of the
> signal in the top level, correct?
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
>
Received on Wed Jan 08 2020 - 20:11:27 CST