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!

Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Observer hitec100
Registered: ‎03-21-2019

follow-up on project mode in Vivado IDE for PR flow and static, RM DCPs


I've just finished reading the above subject posted in 2017 about Partial Reconfiguration (PR) flow not supporting project mode in Vivado for incorporating static and RM checkpoints (DCPs) developed by different Vivado projects.

For example, company A builds the static DCP and company B builds the RM DCP. The recommended path in the link above from 2017 was to use non-project mode to incorporate those 2 DCPs into a PR flow, following the example shown in lab 2 of the UG947.

Is that still the case with the latest Vivado x2018.3 as of this post? If it is, will that continue to be the case for x2019.* releases? Or is it now possible (or will it soon be possible) to use project mode to incorporate those DCPs? There is a growing need for this capability.

0 Kudos
1 Reply
Xilinx Employee
Xilinx Employee
Registered: ‎11-17-2008

Re: follow-up on project mode in Vivado IDE for PR flow and static, RM DCPs


The PR project flow has not changed since I posted that reply a year and a half ago, and while there are no plans to fundamentally change it, there are some solutions in development that could get you closer to what you need (depending on what that is).  Let me be clear what I was describing there:  He was asking about a project-based flow that starts a project with a routed and locked static design checkpoint and then using that to add more RMs.  This is what we do not support -- you cannot have the top level design be a design checkpoint.  You can share the entire static design project and let users add their own RMs, or you can export the static DCP only and continue the design process in a scripted non-project flow, those are the two options.  I guess that if company B supplies a post-synth checkpoint, company A could implement that out-of-context module within the locked static design, but I don't think that's what you're looking for.

Can you tell me more about this "growing need" you mention?  I'm curious about your use case and requirements.  Is the reason the full static project cannot be shared due to proprietary information or license distribution or more than that?  Is there a reason why the non-project flow could not work for you?



0 Kudos