Hi Anand,
I don't understand what you mean by "reset is not properly handled". The testbench applies an active high reset at the start after which the test begins and reset is pulled low. I see you've done the same thing in your test.
Also if you see the testbench there are three tests. Test 1 is *supposed* to pass. This is the same output in your run and my testbench.
report( lf &
"------------------ TEST 1 ------------------------" & lf &
" This should pass"
);
wait until falling_edge(s_clk);
s_a <= X"3fc00000"; -- 1.5
s_b <= X"3fc00000"; -- 1.5
expected_q := X"40100000"; -- 2.25
Test 2 and 3 fail with the IP. These are the tests that show the IP doesn't support subnormal numbers. But you don't seem to have run these tests.
report( lf &
"------------------ TEST 2 ------------------------" & lf &
" Multiply subnormal number to a regular number" & lf &
" The output should be a regular number, but will likely be 0" & lf &
" This will probably fail"
);
wait until falling_edge(s_clk);
s_a <= X"00781136"; -- 1.10264e-38 (subnormal)
s_b <= X"3fc00000"; -- 1.5 (not subnormal)
expected_q := X"01ba0cf5"; -- 6.83442e-38 (not subnormal)
report( lf &
"------------------ TEST 3 ------------------------" & lf &
" Multiply two regular numbers that should produce a subnormal number" & lf &
" The output should be a subnormal number, but will likely be 0" & lf &
" This will probably fail"
);
wait until falling_edge(s_clk);
s_a <= X"1ff7f0d6"; -- 1.05007e-19 (not subnormal)
s_b <= X"1ff7f0d6"; -- 1.05007e-19 (not subnormal)
expected_q := X"00781150"; -- 1.10265e-38 (subnormal)
New Contributor
