UPGRADE YOUR BROWSER

We have detected your current browser version is not the latest one. Xilinx.com uses the latest web technologies to bring you the best online experience possible. Please upgrade to a Xilinx.com supported browser:Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer 11, Safari. Thank you!

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Adventurer
Adventurer
11,704 Views
Registered: ‎03-27-2008

Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

I have a top level schematic with other schematics correctly listed underneith it. However, one of my schematics refuses to list itself under my top level, choosing instead to list itself under the FPGA just above my top level:

 

xc3s700an

---Bad_Schematic.sch

------D5_32.sch

---Top_Level.sch

------Happly_Schematic.sch

------D5_32.sch

 

I have looked at the .sch and .sym files and can't see anything wrong. I even recreated the project and added each file, same problem. Upgraded to 11.4, same.

Any ideas?

0 Kudos
1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
Adventurer
Adventurer
13,846 Views
Registered: ‎03-27-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

Solved it!

 

The symbol type had somehow got changed to GRAPHIC by project navigator, very frustrating.

 

View solution in original post

9 Replies
Adventurer
Adventurer
13,847 Views
Registered: ‎03-27-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

Solved it!

 

The symbol type had somehow got changed to GRAPHIC by project navigator, very frustrating.

 

View solution in original post

Adventurer
Adventurer
11,647 Views
Registered: ‎03-27-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

It has happeend again, but this time the symbol type hasn't been changed.

It seems to happen after I edit a symbol to add pins I didn't realise I'd need when I created the symbol. I update the level above with the new symbol and it pops out of the design hierarchy.

0 Kudos
Historian
Historian
11,637 Views
Registered: ‎02-25-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

btrac wrote:

It has happeend again, but this time the symbol type hasn't been changed.

It seems to happen after I edit a symbol to add pins I didn't realise I'd need when I created the symbol. I update the level above with the new symbol and it pops out of the design hierarchy.


This is the Universe telling you that it's time to dump schematic entry and use an HDL :)

----------------------------Yes, I do this for a living.
0 Kudos
Adventurer
Adventurer
11,631 Views
Registered: ‎03-27-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

I would, but there are at least two problems with that:

1) Me, I'd have to learn it! And there would be no-one else to help check the design

2) VAB issues, it's a lot easier to get schematics validated than 'software'

0 Kudos
Historian
Historian
11,625 Views
Registered: ‎02-25-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

btrac wrote:

I would, but there are at least two problems with that:

1) Me, I'd have to learn it! And there would be no-one else to help check the design


true enough, but the sooner you start, the sooner you'll be good at it!

 


2) VAB issues, it's a lot easier to get schematics validated than 'software'


That's not true at all -- validating HDL is a heckuva lot easier than doing same with schematics. That's what testbenches and verification are all about.

----------------------------Yes, I do this for a living.
0 Kudos
Adventurer
Adventurer
11,617 Views
Registered: ‎03-27-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution
With issue 2, due to the cost associated with VAB acceptance of 'software', schematics are far preferable. Validation that it works isn't the problem, it's the numbnuts verifying/validating it for use on vehicles (external body, VAB)....
0 Kudos
Historian
Historian
11,612 Views
Registered: ‎02-25-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

btrac wrote:
With issue 2, due to the cost associated with VAB acceptance of 'software', schematics are far preferable. Validation that it works isn't the problem, it's the numbnuts verifying/validating it for use on vehicles (external body, VAB)....

Well, I don't know what "VAB" is, but from your description it sounds like a bunch of bureaucratic idiocy.

 

Simply put: verifying a design's correctness is a LOT easier with an HDL. Do these numbnuts really scrutinize pages of schematic code? That's ludicrous.

----------------------------Yes, I do this for a living.
0 Kudos
Adventurer
Adventurer
11,606 Views
Registered: ‎03-27-2008

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution

Vehicle Acceptance Body, it is a load of......

How closely they actually scrutinize code is unknown to me, but they charge a fortune for it. I recall they wanted to charge quite a few £K just to change one line of pascal code. I can see the point of it in general, lives are at stake, but it is a bit over the top. It's a railway environment too, so it's even worse, the strictness seems to be proportionate to the number of lives at risk per vehicle.

0 Kudos
Newbie greg.smith
Newbie
10,374 Views
Registered: ‎03-09-2011

Re: Incorrect Schematic Hierarchy

Jump to solution
 
0 Kudos