-svinputport option in modelsim - system-verilog

I am using modlesim for my design and in this we are passing an option -svinputport=var, what is the use of this option? we are passing `default_nettype none before compiling each design files. Does these both are dependent? Could anyone help me with an example.
The description is as below for the option
svinputport=net|var|compat|relaxed
Select the default kind for an input port that is
declared with a type, but without the var keyword.
Select 'net' for strict LRM compliance, where the
kind always defaults to wire. Select 'var' for
non-compliant behavior, where the kind always defaults
to var. Select 'compat', where only types compatible with
net declarations default to wire. The default is 'relaxed',
where only a type that is a 4-state scalar or 4-state single
dimension vector type defaults to wire.
Question (2)
Thank you very much for the detailed explanation. I have one more doubt related to this. I am getting a warning when I run the following code:
`default_nettype none
module test(
input reg sig1,
output logic sig2);
reg [1:0] ab;
endmodule
xmvlog: *W,NODNTW (test.sv,4|14): Implicit net port (sig1) is not allowed since `default_nettype is declared as 'none'; 'wire' used instead [19.2(IEEE 2001)]. why it is referring input reg sig1 as an implicit net port, I already explicitly declared it as reg? As per the message it is changing to wire so will the statement be like "input wire reg sig1" ?
Can we declare input reg a; in systemverilog(input port with reg type) ? Is this implicitly equivalent to input wire reg a; (if I dont use `default_nettype none)

Verilog is littered with implicit defaults all over the place. When you write
module m(a);
initial $disaply(a);
endmodule
this is implicitly the same as
// direction kind type range signal
module m(inout wire logic [0:0] a);
initial $disaply(a);
endmodule
For inout and input directions, if you omit the kind the default is wire or taken from the `default_nettype setting. The none setting generates an error. However, the default kind for an output is different. As soon as you add a datatype to an output, the default kind goes to var, which is similar to non-port declarations. See this post for more details and examples.
However, very early versions of SystemVerilog/Superlog had input and inout with the same kind default as output. The -svinputport=var switch was added for a very large microprocessor developer customer whose name I cannot mention who did not want to change their code. The =net options is the behavior I mentioned above and is the way current LRM is defined.
The other two options are hybrids between the var/net options, mainly for lazy people using the default_nettype none options and don't want to see errors in their port declarations.

Related

passing generated modports to instances of the same module

I'm pretty sure there is no way to do what I am trying, but just in case there is an interesting clever solution, I thought I'd ask around. I have a parameterized SystemVerilog interface, inside of which I am generating modports
interface some_interface #(parameter NUM_READERS=3);
logic [`kBitsPerProgramCounter-1:0] read_addr[NUM_READERS];
logic [`kBitsPerProgramCounter-1:0] write_addr;
genvar i;
generate
// generates Reader[n].Modport
for (i = 0; i < NUM_READERS; ++i) begin : Reader
modport Modport
(
output .read_addr(read_addr[i])
);
end
endgenerate
endinterface
Using this is easy if I have different module types taking different modports. However, what I wanted to try doing is to have multiple instances of the same module. I tried this by parameterizing on type
module some_block#(parameter type SOMETYPE) (
input logic CLK200MHZ,
SOMETYPE aarrgghh);
But getting it to work syntactically has been challenging. Giving SOMETYPE a default value doesn't work because Vivado complains about not allowing hierarchical types, so right off the bat I don't think this will work. When instantiating, I tried using the full modport name, the full modport name with the instantiated interface, and a few others, but nothing seems to work.
So I am curious if there is a clever way I can have multiple instantiations of some_block, each taking a different generated modport. And if not, is there some fun clever trick I can do to use the generated modports? The idea in the first place was that I have a thing that has one writer and multiple readers. I wanted to generate a modport for each reader so that it could only touch it's own read address. I guess I could always just parameterize some_block on an integer, pass some_block the whole interface, and then rely on some_block to only touch the read address corresponding to the passed in integer, but that might be error prone.
Assuming that 'generate' works, there is nothing to be concerned about modules. There is no need to pass a type parameter. The module port is just supposed to be of the type of your interface.
module top();
some_interface ifc;
for (genvar gi = 0; gi < NUM_REASDERS; gi++) begin: inst
some_block sb(ifc.Reader[gi].Modport);
end
endmodule
module some_block (some_interface ifc);
always_comb myvar = ifc.read_addr;
some_block just always references the 'read_addr' which is the modport var. You can use a generate block in the 'top' module.

How to use a parameter to add or remove a signal from a system verilog interface and modport

Here is a snippet of some interface code that has some parameterized sizes to it. The fourth parameter, HAS_BURST is something I have experimented with, but it has only resulted in compilation errors.
Effectively I am looking for a way to ADD/REMOVE a signal from a interface based on parameter. Is there a way to have a generic interface with removable signals?
interface axi_if
#(parameter ID_WIDTH = 4,
ADDR_WIDTH = 40,
DATA_WIDTH = 64,
HAS_BURST = 0)
();
logic aw_ready;
logic aw_valid;
logic [ID_WIDTH-1:0] aw_bits_id;
logic [ADDR_WIDTH-1:0] aw_bits_addr;
logic [7:0] aw_bits_len;
logic [2:0] aw_bits_size;
generate
if (HAS_BURST)
logic [1:0] aw_bits_burst;
endgenerate
logic [2:0] aw_bits_size;
modport slave (
output aw_ready,
input aw_valid,
input aw_bits_id,
input aw_bits_addr,
input aw_bits_len,
generate
if (HAS_BURST)
input aw_bits_burst,
endgenerate
input aw_bits_size
);
modport master (
input aw_ready,
output aw_valid,
output aw_bits_id,
output aw_bits_addr,
output aw_bits_len,
generate
if (HAS_BURST)
output aw_bits_burst,
endgenerate
output aw_bits_size
);
endinterface
`endif
No, there isn't. Ports aren't valid in generate blocks. Parameters can be used to asjust the width of a port but not remove it entirely. You could use an `ifdef to compile it conditionally but that's an all-or-none solution. There can't be some instances with the signal and others without it.
Having the signal unconditionally present is fine in many situations and it's the easiest way to handle this problem. Tie any unused inputs to logic 0 and unused outputs can remain unconnected.
If neither of these options work there's no other way than to define two different interfaces. Doing this by hand quickly becomes unmaintainable. If there are two variations now you can be sure a third one will be needed soon, then a fourth, a fifth... Many chip design companies have SystemVerilog code generators which create customized modules for each instance.

verilog_mode autoreginput behavior when using assignment

I wonder if the following case is possible.
I have :
module a(
input [2:0] a_i
);
endmodule
module b ();
/*AUTOREGINPUTS*/
a u_a(/*AUTOINST*/)
endmodule
It expands to:
module b ();
/*AUTOREGINPUTS*/
reg [2:0] a_i;
a u_a(/*AUTOINST*/
.a_i(a_i))
endmodule
But if I modify adding the line assign a_i = '0;, then it does not expands AUTOREGINPUTS anymore. Is there a way to expand it even if I'm doing an assignment ?
The short answer is because when running verilog-auto to fill in /*AUTOREGINPUT*/ will exclude any signal that is already declared and by adding assign a_i = '0;, you are declaring a_i.
In Verilog, explicit variable declarations are not required and will take on the default nettype if left undeclared under certain circumstances. So, if I had the following:
module x;
assign myVar = '0;
endmodule
myVar will be implicitly declared to be a net with the default nettype (which by default is wire). You can read more in the System-Verilog LRM (IEEE1800-2009 Section 6.10). One recommendation to avoid typos generating implicitly declared variables is to change the default nettype with the `default_nettype macro to none (ie `default_nettype none on the top of every file); doing this forces all variables to be explicitly declared or the compiler/synthesizer will throw an error.
verilog-mode mode in emacs is aware of implicit declaration and, as such, will not autogenerate anything declared. Thus, when you add the assign statement, you are declaring a_i and so the autogenerator will not "redefine" a_i.
To avoid this, I can only recommend running the generator before you assign any of the variables to be autogenerated. Im not sure if it handles `default_nettype none correctly, but I would assume not.
Also note, it should be /*AUTOREGINPUT*/, not /*AUTOREGINPUTS*/, no 's' at the end.

How to pass a class between two modules?

I have two modules and a class and I would like to move that class from one module to the other. Something like this:
class foo;
int x;
int y;
endclass
module mod_A(output foo foo_inst, output event trig);
initial begin
foo my_foo = new;
my_foo.x = 1;
my_foo.y = 2;
foo_inst = my_foo;
->trig;
end
endmodule
module mod_B(input foo foo_inst, input event trig);
always #(trig) begin
$display("%d%d, is a funky number.", foo_inst.x, foo_inst.y);
end
endmodule
module top();
event trig;
foo foo_inst;
mod_A mod_A(.trig, .foo_inst);
mod_B mod_B(.trig, .foo_inst);
endmodule
Of course there're also some functions defined in the class which are used in each module.
The issue with this setup is that I'm seeing errors for each ports of mod_B:
Error-[RIPLIP] Register in low conn of input port
Non-net variable 'foo_inst' cannot be an input or inout port.
Non-net variable 'trig' cannot be an input or inout port.
EDAplayground does not support class objects as module ports and 1800-2012 only mentions interface declarations, events, arrays structures or unions in Port declarations (23.2.2) so my questions are:
Is it even legal to pass classes through ports? If not, what is an elegant
method of accomplishing this?
What does "Register in low conn of
input port" mean? I'm aware that this might be a compiler specific
error and nothing indicative but if I knew what it was trying to tell me I might be a step closer to fixing this.
A variable of any type can be an input or output port. You might have to write for your compiler
input var foo foo_inst,
But it would be better to use a ref when a port is really a handle.
module mod_A(ref foo foo_inst, ref event trig);
Note that you have a typo with foo_o or foo_inst and a race condition between a trigger ->trig and an event control #(trig).

Difference of SystemVerilog data types (reg, logic, bit)

There are different data types in SystemVerilog that can be used like the following:
reg [31:0] data;
logic [31:0] data;
bit [31:0] data;
How do the three of them differ?
reg and wire were the original types. Wires are constantly assigned and regs are evaluated at particular points, the advantage here is for the simulator to make optimisations.
wire w_data;
assign w_data = y;
// Same function as above using reg
reg r_data;
always #*
r_data = y ;
A common mistake when learning Verilog is to assume the a reg type implies a register in hardware. The earlier optimisation for the simulator can be done through the context of its usage.
This introduces logic which can be used in place of wire and reg.
logic w_data;
assign w_data = y;
// Same function as above using reg
logic r_data;
always #*
r_data = y ;
The type bit and byte have also been created that can only hold 2 states 0 or 1 no x or z. byte implies bit [7:0]. Using these types offers a small speed improvement but I would recommend not using them in RTL as your verification may miss uninitialized values or critical resets.
The usage of bit and byte would be more common in testbench components, but can lead to issues in case of having to drive x's to stimulate data corruption and recovery.
Update
At the time of writing I was under the impression that logic could not be used for tristate, I am unable to find the original paper that I based this on. Until further updates, comments or edits, I revoke my assertion that logic can not be used to create tri-state lines.
The tri type has been added, for explicitly defining a tri-state line. It is based on the properties of a wire, logic is based on the properties of a reg.
tri t_data;
assign t_data = (drive) ? y : 1'bz ;
If you no longer have to support backwards compatibility Verilog then I would recommend switching to using logic and tri. Using logic aids re-factoring and and tri reflects the design intent of a tristate line.
The choice of the name reg turned out to be a mistake, because the existence of registers is instead inferred based on how assignments are performed. Due to this, use of reg is essentially deprecated in favor of logic, which is actually the same type.
logic is a 1-bit, 4-state data type
bit is a 1-bit, 2-state data type which may simulate faster than logic
If a logic is also declared as a wire, it has the additional capability of supporting multiple drivers. Note that by default wire is equivalent to wire logic.
In general, the "nets" (such as wire and tri) are most suitable for designing communication buses.
Practically speaking, for RTL it usually doesn't matter whether you declare with reg, or logic, or wire. However, if you have to make an explicit declaration of a 4-state type (as opposed to when you don't), you should typically choose logic since that is what is intended by the language.
Related articles:
What’s the deal with those wire’s and reg’s in Verilog
An analysis of the "logic" data type by Cliff Cummings - 20021209
As I'm unable to add a comment I've to write what looks like a new answer but isn't. Sigh!
#e19293001, #Morgan, logic defines a 4-state variable unlike bit, and hence a logic variable can be used to store 1'bz so the following code is valid and compiles:
logic t_data;
assign t_data = (drive) ? y : 1'bz ;
But I agree that to reflect the design intent tri should be used instead of logic in these cases (although I must say I don't see people using tri instead of logic/wire too often).
reg and logic are exactly the same. These data types appear inside the always or initial blocks and store values i.e. always #(a) b <= a;, the reg b gets evaluated only when 'a' changes but otherwise it simply stores the value it has been assigned last.
wire are just simply connections and need to continuously driven. I agree that they can behave identical as #Morgan mentioned, but they can be imagined as a piece of hard wire, the value of which changes only the value at the other end or the source changes.
How do the three of them differ?
There is no difference between logic and reg.
The difference between bit and the other two is that bit is 2-state, whereas logic/reg are 4-state.
Refer to IEEE Std 1800-2017, section 6.11.2, 2-state (two-value) and 4-state (four-value) data types:
logic and reg denote the same type.
Also, section 6.3.1 Logic values:
The SystemVerilog value set consists of the following four basic values:
0 —represents a logic zero or a false condition
1 —represents a logic one or a true condition
x —represents an unknown logic value
z —represents a high-impedance state
Several SystemVerilog data types are 4-state types, which can store
all four logic values. All bits of 4-state vectors can be
independently set to one of the four basic values. Some SystemVerilog
data types are 2-state, and only store 0 or 1 values in each bit of a
vector.
Logic data type doesn't permit multiple driver. The last assignment wins in case of multiple assignment .Reg/Wire data type give X if multiple driver try to drive them with different value. Logic data type simply assign the last assignment value.
The "Reg" data type is used in procedural assignment, whereas the "Logic" data type can be used anywhere.