cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
tembridis.com
Explorer
Explorer
12,325 Views
Registered: ‎07-14-2008

[Q] Vivado 2015.1 UpdateMem and USR_ACCESS

Good morning gents and ladies,

 

First off, I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but my problem is kind of related to TCL and the TCL shell command line.

 

Right now, I'm using Vivado 2014.2 and TCL to build my system. However, sooner or later, I'll need to switch to the latest version, which would be 2015.1. Up until now, I've been using data2mem to imprint ELF files, but that is longer an option. With 2015.1 I either need to use the STR/STC ELF association or UpdateMem.

 

Now, STR/STC ELF association doesn't work with my build system, as some parts of my design are build in OOC mode and happend to contain Microblazes. Xilinx already acknowledged that ELF association doesn't work in conjunction with OOC build designs and will fix this in 2015.3. So, until then I'll have to use UpdateMem, which is fine with me, as its use case is almost the same as data2mem.

 

However, when I apply Updatemem on my resulting bitfile, it apperantly clears the USR_ACCESS register, which I use to timestamp the bitfile. This is kind of odd and my question would be: anyone else using UpdateMem and USR_ACCESS timestamps?

0 Kudos
Reply
11 Replies
trenz-al
Scholar
Scholar
12,219 Views
Registered: ‎11-09-2013

asfaik there is a bug

 

TIMESTAMP is cleared...

0 Kudos
Reply
tembridis.com
Explorer
Explorer
12,215 Views
Registered: ‎07-14-2008

Thank you. Do you have any related information on this?

 

I guess it's time to open a case via my customer, that'll be faster than getting any Xilinx attention here.

0 Kudos
Reply
duthv
Xilinx Employee
Xilinx Employee
12,195 Views
Registered: ‎09-14-2007

Hi,

 

Yes please open a SR on this. The behavior is extremely odd that USR_ACCESS is being affected. Updatemem should only be working on the BRAMs in the design

 

Thanks

Duth

 

0 Kudos
Reply
trenz-al
Scholar
Scholar
12,191 Views
Registered: ‎11-09-2013

well, that is not so odd

 

when done by vivado, it is preserved

when from SDK it is erased the usr timestamp

0 Kudos
Reply
duthv
Xilinx Employee
Xilinx Employee
12,188 Views
Registered: ‎09-14-2007

Interesting data point..

 

Is this only seen when using updatemem from SDK? 

0 Kudos
Reply
trenz-al
Scholar
Scholar
12,184 Views
Registered: ‎11-09-2013

well, if ELF is attached to Microblaze in Vivado, then all is fine, if the same elf is merged into the same bit file by SDK then usr_access timestamp is erased.

0 Kudos
Reply
tembridis.com
Explorer
Explorer
12,158 Views
Registered: ‎07-14-2008

Interestingly enough, in my design USR_ACCESS is affected even though I'm not using SDK.

0 Kudos
Reply
Anonymous
Not applicable
10,331 Views

Would somebody from Xilinx like to comment on when this will be fixed?

0 Kudos
Reply
duthv
Xilinx Employee
Xilinx Employee
10,303 Views
Registered: ‎09-14-2007

Hi,

 

Has a case with WTS been opened on this issue as yet?

 

Thanks

Duth

 

0 Kudos
Reply
akboken
Adventurer
Adventurer
7,282 Views
Registered: ‎10-19-2015

I am having the same problem.

 

When I use updatemem, my timestamp info in USR_ACCESS is being set to 0.  Is this bug not fixed ? 

I am creating a new bistream from SDK> 

 

 

0 Kudos
Reply
vertreko
Adventurer
Adventurer
3,007 Views
Registered: ‎11-04-2010

I'm using Vivado 2015.3 and this problem still exists with updatemem. Data2mem seems to work: it does not set USR_ACCESS to 0. Can we get someone from Xilinx to:

  1. Confirm that there is a SR filed on this
  2. Let us know whether it has been fixed in some subsequent version of Vivado

 

0 Kudos
Reply