Use cfu blackbox to help integration with external IP #11
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thank you @dlobato ! I agree the wrapper is quite a hack. In fact I am currently investigating another way of getting rid of the wrapper -- explicitly connecting the CFU to the VexRiscv using LiteX: enjoy-digital/litex#883. But let me take a look at your approach. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Could this be useful to help integrating implementations of cfu. I've seen @tcal-x wrap*.v verilogs and I was wondering if this could make things a bit easier.
With this change an user must provide the implementation of CfuBb module.