cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
larshb
Adventurer
Adventurer
437 Views
Registered: ‎08-30-2018

BUG: Aurora 64b/66b mmcm_not_locked inverted when ticking "generate Aurora without GT"

Jump to solution

Title pretty much sums it up. Whenever you instantiate an Aurora 64b/66b from the IP-catalogue (not in block-design) it works as expected. However when ticking the "generate Aurora without GT" option (and instantiate the GT-wizard separately) and regenerate the support logic the signal "mmcm_not_locked" is inverted. Or rather it is not inverted as opposed to when using the "with GT" option, hence it should be called "mmcm_locked" in this case.

I am using the version Version 12.0 (Rev. 1) of the IP, Vivado 2019.2

0 Kudos
1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
rkhatri
Moderator
Moderator
341 Views
Registered: ‎01-10-2019

Hi @larshb,

Yes your understanding is correct. You can check this file:

rkhatri_0-1612942270544.png

 

Thanks,
Rahul Khatri
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please Kudo or Accept as a solution, If this Post helped you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View solution in original post

5 Replies
rkhatri
Moderator
Moderator
385 Views
Registered: ‎01-10-2019

Hi @larshb,

I am not able to see the signal "mmcm_not_locked" when "generated Aurora without GT" .

rkhatri_0-1612860921273.png

 

Thanks,
Rahul Khatri
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please Kudo or Accept as a solution, If this Post helped you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 Kudos
larshb
Adventurer
Adventurer
376 Views
Registered: ‎08-30-2018

It is routed from the GT submodule from the shared logic <ip_instance>_support.v (and is needed as input on a Chip2Chip cores)

larshb_1-1612862940232.png

larshb_2-1612862993432.png

 

 

 

0 Kudos
rkhatri
Moderator
Moderator
342 Views
Registered: ‎01-10-2019

Hi @larshb,

Yes your understanding is correct. You can check this file:

rkhatri_0-1612942270544.png

 

Thanks,
Rahul Khatri
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please Kudo or Accept as a solution, If this Post helped you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View solution in original post

larshb
Adventurer
Adventurer
289 Views
Registered: ‎08-30-2018

Ok, hopefully it is the only bug, as I can remedy it simply by inverting the signal again.

Is fixing it of any concern to Xilinx?

0 Kudos
rkhatri
Moderator
Moderator
261 Views
Registered: ‎01-10-2019

Hi @larshb,

I will take this to development team. Thanks for your finding.

Thanks,
Rahul Khatri
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please Kudo or Accept as a solution, If this Post helped you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------