Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'parameter'.
-
Hello, I have defined one class "Class A" and when creating instances of that class e.g. A* instA1 = new A (); I want to attach the instA1 object to an sc_in port of my SystemC module as an attribute of that port. - Can I use for that purpose the add_attribute function? - How safe is that? - Are there any other recommended mechanisms (as alternatives)? Thanks.
-
I have a class with an sc_event which should be readable and writeable through getter and setter methods. class IntWithEvent { private: sc_event _ev_wr; sc_event _ev_trigger; public: const sc_event& get_write_event() const { return _ev_wr; } const sc_event& get_trigger_event() const { return _ev_trigger; } void set_trigger_event(sc_event &ev) const { _ev_trigger = ev; // E0349 no operator "=" matches these operands } } Writing the getters was no problem. However the setter throws me an error of no matching assignment operator. Do I need to store a pointer to a sc_event and then set the pointer to the address of the parameter? It doesn't give me compile errors like this. class IntWithEvent { private: sc_event _ev_wr; sc_event *_ev_trigger; public: const sc_event& get_write_event() const { return _ev_wr; } const sc_event& get_trigger_event() const { return *_ev_trigger; } void set_trigger_event(sc_event *ev) { _ev_trigger = ev; } } I was taught to avoid pointers where I can. Is there a way to avoid the pointers?
-
Hi, I am working on IPXACTS -RTL representation. I have seen the following in one of my IPXACTS, where parameters are defined. I have a question regarding this value representation in this above IPXACT. Is this valid as per the standards? And does this mean, in RTL, the following: parameter [0:0] RD_ADDR_INI_PIPE_STAGE [NUM_CORE_INI-1:0] = '{1,1}
-
Hi, I have a question related to appropriate CCI usage in case of composite IP with top-level configuration parameters. Let's imagine we have a composite IP A that consists of IP B and C, making the A a composite IP, since it consists of multiple IPs. Now let's imagine IP B and C have clock frequency parameter associated. The name of parameter in IP A is clk_frequency and the name of parameter in IP B is clock_frequency. For a sake of better user experience let's image that IP A (a top level one, aggregating B and C) wants to provide a convince top level parameter named clk_freq to manipulate the value of two underlying parameters. And value of clk_freq parameter is not used in the IP A. Acc to example 11 provided in the CCI package a value of multiple parameters can be synchronized using the post write callback mechanism. So this approach can be used for synchronizing values of clk_frequency parameter of IP A with value of clock_frequency parameter of IP B. It's not particularly clear to me what is the best way to implement a top-level convenience parameter in A. The most straight forward way seems to be to implement a regular CCI parameter (cci::cci_param<T> param_name;) at IP A level and synchronize with one of the parameters of B or C. Such an approach seems to involve quite some coding, also a "dummy" parameter have to be created, since clk_freq parameter is not used in the IP A. So it makes me wonder if there is a more appropriate way how this functionality can be achieved. Maybe it's possible to create a handle at a level of IP A and somehow expose it to external configurator? Also that would be interesting to know if it's possible to hide parameters of IP B and C from external configurator. I am pretty sure that described use-case scenario was considered during CCI creation and I am simply missing some obvious point here. I'd appreciate any inputs you can provide to help me to understand what is the most appropriate way to implement that. Thanks.
-
Hello, I've been trying to instantiate (if I'm not mistaken) an array of submodules that were created using sc_vector. So far, I've followed the recommendations for using custom creator functions, but I'm kind of lost at how to actually make it work. Especially with sc_bind, which keeps returning me errors. The module master houses an array of ports that will be connected to a corresponding number of slaves. Order of connection does not matter. I'm using MSVC++ 10. The code is as follows: class top : public sc_module { //Submodule declarations master master_i; sc_vector<slave> slave_i; public: // Constructor top( sc_module_name module_name , int k ) : sc_module( module_name ) , master_i("master"), slave_i("slave") { slave_i.init(N_SLAVE, sc_bind(&top::create_slave, this, sc_unnamed::_1, sc_unnamed::_2)("slave",k)); sc_assemble_vector(slave_i, &slave::target_port).bind(master_i.initiator_port); } The creator function, which is a member of the class top, is as follows: static slave* top::create_slave(const char* name, size_t idx) { slave* s = new slave(name,1); // Hardcoding not intended; it's just to get it to // compile return s; } slave class constructor prototype: slave( sc_module_name module_name , int k ); Errors that I have so far: 1>c:\systemc\systemc-2.3.1\src\sysc\packages\boost\bind.hpp(63): error C2825: 'F': must be a class or namespace when followed by '::' 1> c:\systemc\systemc-2.3.1\src\sysc\packages\boost\bind\bind_template.hpp(15) : see reference to class template instantiation 'sc_boost::_bi::result_traits<R,F>' being compiled 1> with 1> [ 1> R=sc_boost::_bi::unspecified, 1> F=slave *(__cdecl *)(const char *,size_t) 1> ] 1> c:\users\khairul\dropbox\cours\systemc\examples\source\11\master_slave\top.h(32) : see reference to class template instantiation 'sc_boost::_bi::bind_t<R,F,L>' being compiled 1> with 1> [ 1> R=sc_boost::_bi::unspecified, 1> F=slave *(__cdecl *)(const char *,size_t), 1> L=sc_boost::_bi::list3<sc_boost::_bi::value<top *>,sc_boost::arg<1>,sc_boost::arg<2>> 1> ] Any ideas? Thanks,
-
There are a number of bit width parameters declared in the my top module. These parameters are passed to the DUT instance and parameterized interface instances. How can I also pass these parameter values to the sequence items, so that the bit widths of the sequence item fields correspond to the bit widths of the interface fields?