??? 04/16/05 11:12 Read: times |
#91724 - explain Responding to: ???'s previous message |
hi,
Jez Smith said:
1, Using a clock for a multiplier does not infer a pipelined multiplier.
I do not know what you mean with it but Altera LPM_MULT description says clean: Port name: clock The clock port provides pipelined operation for the lpm_mult function. For LPM_PIPELINE values other than 0 (default value), the clock port must be connected. Parameter: LPM_PIPELINE Specifies the number of Clock cycles of latency associated with the result[] output. A value of zero (0) indicates that no latency exists, and that a purely combinatorial function will be instantiated. If omitted, the default is 0 (non-pipelined). So what I said: if no clock is used for a multiplier then it is realized as pure cascade summators without pipeline. If clock is enabled for LPM_MULT then synthesis implements pipelined mult function. What is wrong, please? 2, A 10 bit multiplier as a single block of logic is not huge as I tried to show it takes about 190 LE's
Indeed, it "eats" just EPM7256. See below. 4, Nobody uses Altera 7000 cplds for new designs.
Why not? Multiple Array Matrix (MAX) devices are high-performance solutions for a broad array of applications (it is what Altera says on their site). They are not marked as "not recommended for a new design". Moreover, these devices are instant-on and non-volatile and this fact of matter is very useful in some tasks where user needs that CPLD must be ready-to-use immediatelly after power-on. So, maybe some people do not use these devices but I would not say "nobody". 3, The resulting multiplier is not slow and certainly using a standard cpld speeds of at least 70 Mhz are easily achieved.
Depend what you mean saing "is not slow". For example, here we need to multiplicate RGB (8+8+8bits) with alpha-channel (bright) coefficients (8-bit) for the each dot which then comes out from CPLD to DAC. So we use three LPM_MULT each as 8x8 bits. Pure LPM_MULT without clock of Acex EP1K50 does 8x8 bits for about 40ns. Here I say: when the valid data comes to LPM_MULT input lines then the valid result is obtained after 40ns on its output lines. Once again: no clock is used. Then we switch LMP_MULT to pipelined mode. We connect clock 70MHz to it and set LPM_PIPELINE to 3. First clock locks input data into LMP_MULT pipeline and after third clock the valid result appears on its output lines. 70MHz is ~14ns clock period. 14ns is between 1st and 2nd clock + 14ns is between 2nd and 3rd clock + about 7ns is LMP_MULT output register delay. Now the valid result appears on LPM_MULT output lines after about 35ns from 1st clock. Could you say what is the rubbish you mentioned about? And other question: from where do you obtain 70MHz (or even 35 for PLL) in system where only 12MHz crystal is used for MCU? 5, I cannot remember what other rubish you wrote something about costing $30-80
But please just stop writting stuff about things you clearly know nothing about.Its annoying it confuses the issues it doesnt help. Okay, okay, just relax this saturday. Regards, Oleg |
Topic | Author | Date |
Fast Square. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Square dancing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
table lookup??? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
code & algorithm | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
16*16 bit is slower than what I want. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
How fast? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: How Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
... probably impossible in 15 cycles | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
why cycles ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: Microseconds | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
table lookup | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Natsemi appnote or CORDIC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Natsemi link to appnote | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
(a+b)^2=a^2+2*a*b+b^2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thats Slow. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
faster need hardware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
How fast do you need? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: How Fast. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Just? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Incorrect | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Correct? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Whooooopa... Sorry. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I tried... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
optimum? table driven | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Jan metod | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hardware? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
CPLD? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
SILabs f12x does it in hardware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: SiLabs F12x | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Price | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
F12x price | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
F12x MAC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
provided in the datasheet | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Just out of interest | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
clarification | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
CPLD? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
too expensive | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Absolute rubbish Oleg | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
explain | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
your right | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
especially for those... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I need to say this.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
By the way..... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
just a demo | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hang on. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Oh bollocks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Well oleg | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Please check my answer. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Here you go | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
You're having me on. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Pascal? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Pascal? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Why ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
It was changed because,,, | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Its because | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
For Jez | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
For Michael | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
simulation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: Fast Square | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Prahlad, waithing for a conclusion | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
just an exercise... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Tricky | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Jez asked his cat, I asked my sheep | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Conclusion. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
SPI EEPROM![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 |