Jump to content

maehne

Members
  • Content Count

    315
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Everything posted by maehne

  1. Yes, you'll need to add a helper module C, which upsamples your slow signal to the fast rate, i.e., which input rate is 1 and output rate is 60. In the simplest case, you can just duplicate 60 times the same value. However, you may also implement some kind of interpolation. Note: By creating a feedback loop, you will also have to specify a suitable delay and initial samples to restore causality! I suggest that you read the section 2.1 "Modeling fundamentals" of the the SystemC AMS User's Guide to gain further insight.
  2. Thanks for reporting this issue and analysing the cause! I have forwarded your report to the SystemC LWG. Could you please try to make the preprocessor condition more strict by adding "!defined(__MINGW32__)" (see here and here) and report back whether this fixes the issue?
  3. See this thread, SystemC 2.3.1 triggers some known Valgrind reports. Most should be fixed in the latest SystemC release (version 2.3.3) available from Accellera. You may also consider building and using SystemC directly from the official public Git repository. If you search this Forum for "valgrind", you can find several other relevant threads. If the problem persists with the latest SystemC release, it would be nice if you could post a complete reproducer so that we can have a closer look. @Philipp A Hartmann may then be able to make some more comments.
  4. As you are already building your SystemC model using DLLs, I would suggest that you also build SystemC as a DLL and link to it. This most probably should fix your problem as suggested by @Roman Popov.
  5. Thanks @Timur Kelin for reporting this issue! I have forwarded it to the SystemC LWG to investigate how to fix it best in the proof-of-concept implementation of SystemC.
  6. Without any self-contained code example exposing this error, it will be difficult for anyone on this forum to help you. Do you observe the same error, when running your example in the Accellera proof-of-concept implementation of SystemC instead of the SystemC version coming with your vendor tool?
  7. Thanks for reporting this issue! I think your use case is justified. However, the decision to not installing the header seems to have been made on purpose as utils/sc_stop_here.h is explicitly added to NO_H_FILES in src/sysc/utils/files.am. The behavioural difference between the Automake and CMake-based build flow is probably unintentional. I have reported the issue to the LWG for investigation.
  8. Building SystemC using G++ from MSYS2/MinGW-64 should work as described in the INSTALL file. To diagnose your problem, it would help if you could provide all commands, which you used to configure and build SystemC 2.3.3 and then to run the tests. Please, also provide the log file generated by configure. Did you observe any errors/warnings during the compilation of the SystemC library? You should pass in the CXXFLAGS to your configure call as described in the INSTALL file, section "SystemC Library Configuration Switches": ../configure CXXFLAGS="-DSC_OVERRIDE_DEFAULT_STACK_SIZE=0x80000" Y
  9. Thanks @plafratt for providing these additional details. I have reported this issue to the LWG for investigation. The warning can be probably fixed by default-initialising the tmp in line 235 of sc_fifo.h
  10. Your message is not providing enough information about your environment. Which version of SystemC did you compile. I suggest you to start with the latest released version of the SystemC proof-of-concept library. Did you follow all the instructions found in section "Installation Notes for Windows" of INSTALL.md? Did you compile SystemC as a static library or DLL? Where you able to build and execute the examples coming along with the SystemC library? Did you also follow the instructions for "Creating SystemC Applications" when you compiled your test program? If you want
  11. Have you tried to compile and run a simple hello-world-style C++ program in the same environment, from which you called configure? The config.log shows that your PATH contains the bin directories of many different EDA toolchains. Some of them come before the bin directories of your host OS. This may cause issues as these EDA toolchain installation tend to include a lot of basic libraries, which are normally provided by the host OS. This can cause interferences. You may try configure and build SystemC in an environment, where the PATH got pruned of all the EDA toolchain bin paths.
  12. @plafratt: It would be very helpful if you could provide more detailed information to reproduce your observation as suggested by @Roman Popov. With what version of g++ running on which platform have you observed the warning. A small self-contained code example demonstrating the issue would help us to reproduce the issue on our side so that we can forward the issue with enough information to the SystemC Language Working Group for fixing.
  13. Thanks @Asdruv for reporting this bug! I have forwarded your report to the LWG. Best regards, Torsten Maehne
  14. sc_core::sc_in<T> only allows binding of a single sc_core::sc_signal<T> (cf. to IEEE Std 1666-2011, clause 6.8). However, you may use for in_B a sc_core::sc_port<sc_core::sc_signal_in_if<T>, 3, SC_ONE_OR_MORE_BOUND> (cf. to IEEE Std 1666-2011, clause 5.12) that will accept binding of exactly three signals. The implementation of the OR relation of the three signals can be then handled inside an SC_METHOD of objB. To access the three different signal from in_B, you can use the operator[] implemented by the sc_port. By the way, you may also specify a different number of ch
  15. If you don't use the member functions added that were added for convenience to `sc_in`, `sc_out`, and `sc_inout` to, e.g., call `read()`, `write()`, and the event member functions via the `.` operator than via the corresponding member function in the interface accessed via the `->` operator, you might be able to avoid entirely the derivation of new port classes. Instead, you could simply use a template alias, which was introduced with C++'11: template<typename T> using sc_in_opt = sc_core::sc_port<sc_signal_in_if<T>, 1, SC_ZERO_OR_MORE_BOUND>; template<typename T>
  16. This output does not hint for any problem. What output do you expect from your alu model? You need to implement explicitly any debug output in your SystemC model using, e.g., the SC_REPORT_* macros. Tracing of signal using the sc_trace() mechanism won't cause any additional output on the console either. If you expect some output, you will have to share the code of a minimal working example exposing your problem. Your CMakeLists.txt looks mostly fine. However, it contains several unnecessary lines. After finding SystemC using find_package, you only need to make sure that your executable
  17. Your calls to the configure script don't include the option --prefix to specify the destination directory for installation. This is strongly recommended as the SystemC installation layout does not match well with the standard Unix directory layout for a conflict-free installation. Personally, I prefer to install SystemC on Unix-like platforms to /opt/systemc-2.3.3 (or similar). After make install, you can make sure that the include and lib-* directory below the prefix contains the necessary files. When building against this SystemC version, you will have to pass the proper include and linker f
  18. Before implementing your own ports and attempting to modify the SystemC code, you should first get familiar with the basic concepts and capabilities of SystemC. I suggest that you read a good introductory text to SystemC, e.g., "SystemC from the Ground Up" by David Black et al. That said, your requirement description seems to indicate that you could achieve the wanted functionality by using simply the standard SystemC ports and signals: One instance of sc_core::sc_out<T> in some module, which drives the global signal of type sc_core::sc_signal<T> that is bound to it during ela
  19. The SystemC libraries and their associated headers are usually not installed into the standard locations (/usr/lib/ and /usr/include/), where they would be found automatically by the compiler and linker. Instead, they are typically installed into their own directory hierarchy, e.g., below /opt/systemc-2.3.1/. Therefore, you need to indicate their location explicitly to the compiler and linker by passing the appropriate flags, e.g.: $ c++ -o my_tb my_tb.cpp -I/opt/systemc-2.3.1/include -L/opt/systemc-2.3.1/lib-linux -lsystemc Due to this, you also usually include the SystemC header using
  20. Either you as the library author or the user of that library will need to provide at least an empty implementation of sc_main() to satisfy the linker. There is no way around it. I would like to also suggest that you update your SystemC installation to the latest version 2.3.3.
  21. value_changed_event() returns a constant reference to an sc_core::sc_event. A SystemC method or thread can be made sensitive to that event to get activated each time the corresponding sc_event gets notified. Easiest would be to connect your sc_signals to matching sc_in port of a dedicated module, which sets up the method or thread responsible for counting your bit changes. I recommend that you read a good introduction to the basic concepts of SystemC, e.g., David C. Black et al. "SystemC from the Ground Up", 2nd ed. The SystemC elaboration and simulation semantics are also described in clause
  22. The implementation of the TLM proof-of-concept library depends on SystemC. Therefore, you will need to link your application, which makes use of TLM, to the SystemC library. You can check it yourself by looking into the corresponding TLM headers: They include headers that are part of the SystemC implementation. Furthermore, the TLM implementation is not anymore header-only. The compiled .cpp implementation files are directly linked into the SystemC library file.
  23. Thanks for reporting this bug! I forwarded it to the SystemC Language Working Group, so that it can be fixed for the next release of the SystemC proof-of-concept library.
  24. Glad I could help! You have grasped the idea correctly.
×
×
  • Create New...