Xavi/cvw
1
0
Fork 0
forked from Github_Repos/cvw
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Added note about strange vivado behavior not inferring block ram.

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Ross Thompson 2023-04-06 15:09:35 -05:00
parent d121364997
commit 270b3371f1
1 changed files with 9 additions and 9 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

18
src/generic/mem/ram1p1rwe.sv
View File

@ -68,6 +68,8 @@ module ram1p1rwe #(parameter DEPTH=64, WIDTH=44) (
// READ first SRAM model
// ***************************************************************************
end else begin: ram
// *** Vivado is not implementing this as block ram for some reason.
// The version with byte write enables it correctly infers block ram.
integer i;
// Read
@ -82,15 +84,13 @@ module ram1p1rwe #(parameter DEPTH=64, WIDTH=44) (
// Write divided into part for bytes and part for extra msbs
// Questa sim version 2022.3_2 does not allow multiple drivers for RAM when using always_ff.
// Therefore these always blocks use the older always @(posedge clk)
if(WIDTH >= 8)
always @(posedge clk)
// coverage off
// ce only goes low when cachefsm is in READY state and Flush is asserted.
// for read-only caches, we only goes high in the STATE_WRITE_LINE cachefsm state.
// so we can never get we=1, ce=0 for I$.
if (ce & we)
always @(posedge clk)
// coverage off
// ce only goes low when cachefsm is in READY state and Flush is asserted.
// for read-only caches, we only goes high in the STATE_WRITE_LINE cachefsm state.
// so we can never get we=1, ce=0 for I$.
if (ce & we)
// coverage on
RAM[addr] <= #1 din;
end
RAM[addr] <= #1 din;
endmodule