Hi Laura, No. The one with 11.5 used an old commit 1c2035ed9e4f4bcc98e9f08f2722d34dd4f10872 (Nov 12, 2012) from ska-sa.
I believe Dave M used the latest one from casper-astro (waiting for his answer). So, as a caveat to what Dale has mentioned in his email, the problem could be between yellow blocks and not necessarily the toolflow, though I do not know if yellow block has changed significantly. Thanks, Nimish On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Vertatschitsch, Laura E. < lvertatschit...@cfa.harvard.edu> wrote: > Gary, > > Can you confirm the same mlib_devel checkout was used for both compiles? > > --Laura > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Gary, Dale E. <dale.e.g...@njit.edu>wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> I am not sure how many out there are using or planning to use the KatADC >> boards in their projects, but I thought I would report on our experience, >> which contains a warning: Do not use Xilinx version 11.x for ROACH2 >> development that includes KatADC. We started with that version, and did >> not want to slow development by upgrading. However, snap blocks that >> capture the ADC time-domain output showed numerous "glitches" like that >> shown in the attached file. The top plot shows the histogram of the two >> ADC channels on a single KatADC board, while the middle plot shows the >> time-domain data. The green channel was behaving well, but the blue >> channel shows many glitches, both positive and negative. The behavior >> changes whenever the ROACHes are reloaded, so that which channels are >> affected can change, and can be better or worse at different times. >> >> We created a test design to demonstrate the problem, compiled on 11.x, >> and then asked Dave MacMahon to compile the same model again on Xilinx >> system generator 13.3. We found that when the new bof file is loaded there >> is no sign of the glitches. We are now upgrading to 14.5, and will report >> our experience with that later. >> >> There may be other reasons not to use 11.x on ROACH2, but we did not see >> any other problems, including earlier tests with iADC boards. It was only >> when we began using the KatADCs that we saw these anomalies. >> >> Regards, >> Dale >> > >
