I'm trying to run a large design with Yosys but I get the following error
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'ord::Exception'
what(): Net logical_tile_clb_mode_clb__0.logical_tile_clb_mode_default__fle_0.logical_tile_clb_mode_default__fle_mode_n1_lut4__ble4_0.logical_tile_clb_mode_default__fle_mode_n1_lut4__ble4_mode_default__lut4_0.ccf has segments vector empty
I know I need to shorten the wire names but I was wondering if Yosys can automatically take care of that since it would take too long to do it manually
Related
I thought this question would have been asked already, but I can't find it, so here goes: I've noticed that numpy.save commands only trigger, i.e. the file to-be-created is actually created, after the entire code has finished running. This is bad when the code takes days or weeks to run, and I want to pin down exactly which function, and what arguments into the function, are causing the bottleneck.
There is a similar issue with the print() command; it doesn't write to the output file immediately but rather waits until the entire code is finished before writing. I can force it to write immediately with this code:
def printnow(*messages):
w=open("output.log","a")
for message in messages:
w.write(str(message))
w.write(" ")
w.write("\n")
w.close()
I was wondering whether it's possible to do an analogous thing, i.e. force an immediate save, for numpy arrays. No need for appending; overwriting with the current value of the numpy array is fine.
If it makes a difference, I'm not running the code on my personal computer but a group server, which I issue commands to and check on using Putty and WinSCP.
Thanks
Edit: I tried another package, shelve, and it encounters the same problem. I create a global variable called function_calls and initialize it to 0. Then, at the start of the function that I suspect is causing the bottleneck, I put in the following code:
global function_calls
file='function_inputs'+str(function_calls)
function_shelf=shelve.open(file,'n')
for key in dir():
function_shelf[key]=locals()[key]
function_calls+=1
This code is intended to create a new file that saves the function inputs, each time the function is called. Unfortunately, 9 hours into starting the run, no files have been created. So I suspect Python is just waiting until the whole run is finished before creating the files I asked it to.
In LabView, I want to take some readings into a Measurement File in a while loop and run a Read From Measurement File block only after exit from a while loop as below:
How can I achieve this event driven running?
P.S. Other blocks are removed for convenience.
Enforce execution order with an error wire as shown.
Wire error out from your Write to Measurement File function to error in of the Read from Measurement File.
LabVIEW dataflow works like this: data does not appear at the output terminals of a function, VI or structure (such as the While loop) until the loop completes, and a function, VI or structure does not execute until data is available at all input terminals that are wired. So the Read will not execute until the error data is output from the completed While loop.
Using the error wire to enforce the order of execution like this is common practice in LabVIEW, and has another advantage: most VIs are written to not perform their function if an error is present at error in, but instead 'fall through' and return the same error at their output. So you can wire up a chain of operations linked by the error wire and catch and handle any errors at the end of the chain.
If you want more precise control over how LabVIEW handles errors look at the help, but this page describes how to specifically ignore an error if you don't want it to stop your program, and this site has a good overview of techniques for error handling.
I am writing the code for expression evaluator using lex and yacc which can have following operations:
/ , * , + , - , pow(a,b) , sqrt(a) , log(a)
also there can be brackets in the expression.
Input expression is in the file "calculator.input"
I have to compare the time of my code with bc, I am facing following problems:
1) bc doesn't accept pow(a,b) and log(a) it instead accepts a^b and l(a) .
How do I change it?
2) How do I use the bc from the main funtion in the yacc program ? or that can't be done?
I think it would be easier to change your code than to change bc, but if you want to try, you can find pointers to bc's source bundles on the GNU project page and in the FreeBSD source mirror. Of course, the end result would not strictly speaking be bc any more, so I don't know if it would still count, for the purposes of your assignment.
I don't know what the specifications are for the pow function you are supposed to implement, but note that bc's ^ operator only allows integer exponents, so it might not work on all your test cases (unless, of course, all your test cases have integer exponents.) You could compute a^b with e(l(a)*b), but it won't be as accurate for integer exponents:
e(l(10)*100)
99999999999999999920085453156357924020916787698393558126052191252537\
96016108317256511712576426623511.11829711443225035170
10^100
10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\
000000000000000000000000000000000
You might want to consult with your tutor, professor, or teaching assistant.
If you don't want to (or are not allowed to) generate the bc equivalent test cases by hand, you might be able to automate the process with sed (if the exponential sub-expressions are not complicated), or by adapting your calculator to output the expression in bc's syntax. The latter would be a fairly easy project, and you'd probably learn something by implementing it.
If you are using a Unix-like system, you can easily run any command-line utility from a C program. (Indeed, you can do that on non-Unix-like systems, too, but the library functions will differ.) If you don't need to pass data to bc through its stdin, you can use the popen(3) library function, which is certainly the easiest solution.
Otherwise, you will have to set up a pair of pipe(2)s (one for writing to bc's stdin and the other for reading from its stdout), fork(2) a child process, and use one of the exec* function calls, probably execlp(3) or execvp(3), to run bc in the child. (Watch out for pipe deadlock while you are writing to and reading from the child.) Once the child process finishes (which you'll notice because you'll get an EOF on the pipe you're using to read from its stdout, you should use wait(3) or waitpid(3) to get its status code.
If all that seems too complicated, you could use the much simpler solution of running both your program and bc from your shell. (You can use the time shell built-in on Unix-like shells to get a measure of execution time, although it will not be microsecond resolution which might be necessary for such a simple program.)
I am using Xilinx ISE 10.1 to run some verilog code. In the code I want to write the register values of 3 registers in a file, cipher.txt. The following is the code snippet:
if (clk_count==528) begin
f1 = $fopen("cipher.txt", "w");
$fwrite(f1, "clk: %d", clk_count[11:0]);
$fwrite(f1, "plain: %h", plain[31:0]);
$fwrite(f1, "cipher: %h", cipher[31:0]);
$fclose(f1);
end
At the end of execution, the contents of cipher.txt is found as:
clk: %dplain: %hcipher: %h
There is no other error encountered, but a warning comes up corresponding to the 3 fwrite's:
Parameter 3 is not constant in call of system task $fwrite.
Parameter 3 is not constant in call of system task $fwrite.
Parameter 3 is not constant in call of system task $fwrite.
The values of the registers clk_count and cipher change on every clock cycle (value of register plain remains constant throughout), and the values are written to cipher.txt when clk_count equals 528 (indicated by the if statement)
Can anybody provide some insight and/or help me get past this hurdle?
Thanks.
It appears that ISE expects the arguments to $fwrite to be constant. The warnings are referring to clk_count[11:0], plain[31:0], and cipher[31:0], which are not constant. By definition they are changing each cycle so they are not known at compile time. This also explains why they are not printing and you are seeing %d and %h in the output.
There is nothing to my knowledge in the Verilog spec that requires the arguments to $fwrite be constant. The same code works as expected with Cadence Incisive. My guess is that it's a limitation of ISE, so you may want to check with Xilinx.
Possible work-arounds:
1) Use $swrite to create a string with the proper formatting. Then write the string to the file.
2) Try using an intermediate variable in the calls to $fwrite. Maybe the part-selects are throwing it off. e.g.
integer foo;
foo = clk_count[11:0];
$fwrite(... , foo , ...);
Either of those might work, or not.
Out of curiosity, if you remove the part-selects, and try to print clk_count without the [11:0] , do you get the same warnings?
i have used following code to repeat a process creation/close iteratively
dim vProcessInfo as new ProcessInfo
For i= 1 to 100
dim p as new Process
vProcessInfo.Arguments = "some"+i.toString()
p.StartInfo = vProcessInfo
p.Start()
p.WaitForExit()
p.Close()
Next i
the above code worked for me successfully. but it takes too much time for process creation and dispose. i had to change process argument dynamically in the iteration. is there any way to change the process argument dynamically. or is there any better method to reduce time. pls help me
"Is there any way to change the process argument dynamically" - do you mean you want to start one process, and change its command line arguments after it's started? No, you can't do that - but you could communicate with it in other ways, for example:
Using standard input/output (e.g. write lines of text to its standard input)
Using files (e.g. you write to a file, it monitors the directory, picks up the file and processes it)
Using named pipes or sockets
Creating a process is a relatively slow operation. You can't easily speed that up - but if you can change your process in some way like the above, and just launch it once, that should make it a lot faster.