Reply by HT-Lab October 16, 20082008-10-16
"John Speth" <johnspeth@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:gd7ken$9ph$1@aioe.org...
> "Pinhas" <bknpk@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:4a8728cf-85d9-4cf8-90e2-f749e2cc4e0d@p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com... >> http://bknpk.no-ip.biz/cpu_8051_ver/top.html >> Stable Design: The design is translated from a VHDL dalton project >> http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~dalton/i8051/i8051syn. >> Small Design: Consumes only 324 Flip-Flops: map report >> Fast Design: 50MHz for a xc4vlx25-10 XILINX device: timing report > > But I wonder why anyone would want to put such an archaic computing > machine in an FPGA (except for academic purposes). There are much better > cores available.
https://admin.na3.acrobat.com/_a803410391/p86518030/ Hans www.ht-lab.com
> > JJS > >
Reply by John Speth October 16, 20082008-10-16
"Pinhas" <bknpk@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:4a8728cf-85d9-4cf8-90e2-f749e2cc4e0d@p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> http://bknpk.no-ip.biz/cpu_8051_ver/top.html > Stable Design: The design is translated from a VHDL dalton project > http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~dalton/i8051/i8051syn. > Small Design: Consumes only 324 Flip-Flops: map report > Fast Design: 50MHz for a xc4vlx25-10 XILINX device: timing report
But I wonder why anyone would want to put such an archaic computing machine in an FPGA (except for academic purposes). There are much better cores available. JJS
Reply by Pinhas October 16, 20082008-10-16
On 16 =D7=90=D7=95=D7=A7=D7=98=D7=95=D7=91=D7=A8, 08:27, "Meindert Sprang"
<m...@NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> wrote:
> "Nils" <n.pipenbri...@cubic.org> wrote in message > > news:6lnd94Fda23nU1@mid.uni-berlin.de... > > > > > Jim Granville wrote: > > > >> Fast Design: 50MHz for a xc4vlx25-10 XILINX device: timing report > > > I don't want to nitpick. It looks like a nice and (maybe more important=
)
> > little project. > > > But on the web site I see the following performance figures: > > > I8051_ALU: > > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0Critical Path Length (ns): 178 > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0Maximum Clock Speed (MHz): 5.63 > > > I have to admit that I'm a FPGA noob, but I think that part deserves > > some optimization. > > And some work too.... > > Quote: > Limitations: > =C2=A0 This implementation is not cycle/timing compatible. > =C2=A0 Interrupt handling is not currently implemented. > =C2=A0 Peripheral devices are not currently implemented. > > Meindert
As far as I remeber this is a multicycle path. But I'll double check.
Reply by Meindert Sprang October 16, 20082008-10-16
"Nils" <n.pipenbrinck@cubic.org> wrote in message
news:6lnd94Fda23nU1@mid.uni-berlin.de...
> Jim Granville wrote: > >> > >> Fast Design: 50MHz for a xc4vlx25-10 XILINX device: timing report > > > > I don't want to nitpick. It looks like a nice and (maybe more important) > little project. > > But on the web site I see the following performance figures: > > I8051_ALU: > > Critical Path Length (ns): 178 > Maximum Clock Speed (MHz): 5.63 > > I have to admit that I'm a FPGA noob, but I think that part deserves > some optimization.
And some work too.... Quote: Limitations: This implementation is not cycle/timing compatible. Interrupt handling is not currently implemented. Peripheral devices are not currently implemented. Meindert
Reply by Symon October 15, 20082008-10-15
"Nils" <n.pipenbrinck@cubic.org> wrote in message 
news:6lnd94Fda23nU1@mid.uni-berlin.de...
> Jim Granville wrote: >>> >>> Fast Design: 50MHz for a xc4vlx25-10 XILINX device: timing report >> > > I don't want to nitpick. It looks like a nice and (maybe more important) > little project. > > But on the web site I see the following performance figures: > > I8051_ALU: > > Critical Path Length (ns): 178 > Maximum Clock Speed (MHz): 5.63 > > I have to admit that I'm a FPGA noob, but I think that part deserves some > optimization. > > Nils
Without reading TFA, I agree, I laughed where it says it's a small design because it only uses 324 FFs, and yet it uses 10 times as many LUTs! Cheers, Syms.
Reply by Nils October 15, 20082008-10-15
Jim Granville wrote:
>> >> Fast Design: 50MHz for a xc4vlx25-10 XILINX device: timing report >
I don't want to nitpick. It looks like a nice and (maybe more important) little project. But on the web site I see the following performance figures: I8051_ALU: Critical Path Length (ns): 178 Maximum Clock Speed (MHz): 5.63 I have to admit that I'm a FPGA noob, but I think that part deserves some optimization. Nils
Reply by Jim Granville October 15, 20082008-10-15
Cross posted to comp.arch.fpga, as this is an intersting resource.

Pinhas wrote:

> http://bknpk.no-ip.biz/cpu_8051_ver/top.html > > # > > Stable Design: The design is translated from a VHDL dalton project > http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~dalton/i8051/i8051syn. > # > > Small Design: Consumes only 324 Flip-Flops: map report
More map report details, from the link : Target Device : xc4vlx25 Number of Slice Flip Flops: 324 out of 21,504 1% Total Number 4 input LUTs: 2,423 out of 21,504 11%
> # > > Fast Design: 50MHz for a xc4vlx25-10 XILINX device: timing report
-jg
Reply by Pinhas October 15, 20082008-10-15
http://bknpk.no-ip.biz/cpu_8051_ver/top.html

#

Stable Design: The design is translated from a VHDL dalton project
http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~dalton/i8051/i8051syn.
#

Small Design: Consumes only 324 Flip-Flops: map report
#

Fast Design: 50MHz for a xc4vlx25-10 XILINX device: timing report