- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic to the Top
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
Why this naming rule will report error?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-04-2012 06:31 PM
Hi All,
in my design, there are 2 similar signals, one is ssn[2] and another is ssn_2, the port define is below:
input [2:0] ssn;
output ssn_2;
when synthesize, ISE will report error "the net ssn_2 is not found", why?
Re: Why this naming rule will report error?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-05-2012 12:38 PM
Hi
1001 resons,
the most likely I gues is that the signal is not used in th edesign,
and is optimised away, a fairly common mistake.
It does raise the question of the naming convention yoru using,
try changing ssn_2 to ssn_b
if ssn_b is reported as missing, its benn optimised away,
if it reports ssn_2, oops....
Re: Why this naming rule will report error?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-09-2012 03:30 AM
Hi
Actually, the signal is used.
After change ssn_2 to ssn_b, it is OK.
So I doubt that ssn_2 and ssn[2] are treated as same in ISE naming convention.
Re: Why this naming rule will report error?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-09-2012 04:23 AM
an interesting quirk
but at least you have a work around.











