Hi Johnathon, What incantation are you using with mkbof? I believe what you want is:
mkbof_64 -o output.bof -s core_info.tab -t 3 top.bin Note you want a .bin rather than a .bit file -- I believe this is an option in bitgen (maybe it automatically happens in planahead). Jack On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, 2:27 a.m. Gard, Johnathon D. <johnathon.g...@nist.gov> wrote: > Hello Casperites, > > > > ROACH2, MATLAB 2012a (I think), ISE 14.7, Ubuntu 14.04 LTS > > > I am working on compiling firmware without timing errors. More like > ignoring static configuration register timing errors. Any rate, I have been > pulling my design into PlanAhead successfully and applying some DSP slice > constraints with some success. When it comes time to generating a bof file, > I used the mkbof_64 executable located in the implementation directory that > simulink creates. This seems to work fine. The problem arises when I move > the generated bof file to my ROACH2 and try to program the FPGA. I upload > the bof via python and call the progdev() command through python. This > fails without anything meaningful in python. However when watching the > serial output from the PPC, I get this: > > > /usr/bof # roach open config called > rdev gpio preconfig doneProgrammed fpga device id = ffffffff > Attempted to program incorrect configuration onto Virtex6 FPGAroach > release config called > > > I am not sure what might be happening here. I was wondering if anyone else > had tried this or ran into such a problem before. > > > Other notes and ideas: > > I could be using the wrong mkbof, but when a design meets timing the > casper_xps gui script makes a bof that works. So, maybe the script uses a > different mkbof_64. > > > There is another mkbof executable, but that one does not seem to function. > I am assuming it is the 32 bit version, which would mean I would need a > bunch of 32 bit libraries. > > > There are options in the PlanAhead bitfile generation and I could have > those wrong. This could be very likely. > > > I could alternatively use the system.ucf file updated by PlanAhead > through the casper_xps process in matlab. However this would drop my > control of the PAR which seems to have a strong influence on how well it > meets timing. Ironically, timing driven placement gets the far worse timing > results. > > > As far as what it running on the PPC and what katcp library I am using, > That is a very good question which I truly don't know the answer to. > > > Any other ideas or solutions? > > > Johnathon Gard > > National Institute of Standards and Technology > > > >
