| Author |
Message |
mersault
Joined: 05 Nov 2009 Posts: 2 Location: chile
|
05 Nov 2009 0:17 diference between verilog and schematic |
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I'm working on a project in a spartan 3e with xilinx's ISE tool.
I made a half adder with schematic and this is the report
Device utilization summary:
---------------------------
Selected Device : 3s500efg320-5
Number of Slices: 0 out of 4656 0%
Number of IOs: 4
Number of bonded IOBs: 4 out of 232 1%
I made the same half adder with verilog
module halfadder(a, b, sum, carry);
input a, b;
output sum, carry;
assign sum = a^b;
assign carry = a&b;
endmodule
and this is the report...
Device utilization summary:
---------------------------
Selected Device : 3s500efg320-5
Number of Slices: 1 out of 4656 0%
Number of 4 input LUTs: 2 out of 9312 0%
Number of IOs: 4
Number of bonded IOBs: 4 out of 232 1%
why verilog programming uses a slice while the schematics doesn't?
there's a method to optimize area in verilog?
I hope that you could help me..
Greetings
pd: this is my first post.. so, hello to all the people of this forum
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Google AdSense

|
05 Nov 2009 0:17 Ads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wd5gnr
Joined: 21 Jan 2009 Posts: 7 Helped: 1
|
05 Nov 2009 6:23 Re: diference between verilog and schematic |
|
|
|
|
What's your schematic look like? Are you inferring a dedicated adder resource? Or... what are your ISE settings? Perhaps it is preserving too much of your verilog.
I wonder if you tried:
assign { carry, sum } = a+b;
If that would give you a better infer?
Just a thought.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mersault
Joined: 05 Nov 2009 Posts: 2 Location: chile
|
05 Nov 2009 15:24 Re: diference between verilog and schematic |
|
|
|
|
| wd5gnr wrote: |
What's your schematic look like? Are you inferring a dedicated adder resource? Or... what are your ISE settings? Perhaps it is preserving too much of your verilog.
I wonder if you tried:
assign { carry, sum } = a+b;
If that would give you a better infer?
Just a thought. |
hello, thank you for your answer..
with your method the utilization device is the same...
my schematic look like this
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |