Honored ContributorHello,
How do I get rid of this warning?warning: clocks_pll_1|nios_pll_1|altpll_component|auto_generated|pll1|clk[1] could not be matched with a port or pin or register or keeper or net.[/I][/I] Thanks, AA
Honored ContributorIt's from your .sdc file. You might be able to double-click on the warning in TimeQuest and it will take you to the location, but it doesn't always work. If not, just search on that name in your .sdc file. I don't know what constraint it's in or what it's supposed to match, but something seems wrong. Use TimeQuest's View -> Name Finder to help. (There's a space in the word "generated", but it seems like that would cause another error...)
Honored ContributorHello Rysc
I have a PLL. The input to the PLL is coming from a port on the FPGA. The PLL generates 5 clock frequencies [clk[0] to clk[4]]. In Time Quest when I go to "Create Generated Clock" I am not able to find the pins "clk[2] and clk[4]" [in the target filed]. Does this have anything to do with the location of the port [which is an input to PLL] on FPGA ?. [ie different pin locations have different properties associated with them] Thanks, AAHonored ContributorI can find "clocks_pll_1\|ncr_pll_1\|altpll_component\|auto_generated\|pll1\|clk\[1\]" in the Name Finder.
Honored ContributorMost likely clk[2] and clk[4] were synthesized out. That's either because they don't drive logic(perhaps the logic they drive was synthesized out), or possibly it was merged with an identical output of the PLL.
Honored ContributorOkay thanks.
a) How do I know when to use the option "Set False Path" b) In the Summary(setup) two clocks have negative slack, how do I fix it? Thanks, AAHonored Contributora) Your design may have paths that TimeQuest is analyzing but that you have explicitly designed to behave asynchronously. An example might be an error signal coming out of one domain(and held high) and asynchronously sampled in another domain(and double-registered to remove metastability). Another example might be a signal that is static, i.e. it comes up as a 1 or a 0, but never changes after that.
Note that you write a design and need to know how it should be timed. The .sdc just tells TimeQuest how it should be designed. It doesn't work the other way though, i.e. if you add a set_false_path to something that doesn't make it so that the circuit behaves asynchronously. (It's a terrible mistake when a user adds a false path to something that really needs to be made synchronous. The system will break in hardware, the probelm is usually not simulatable, and it takes serious low-level debug to find the issue.) b) There are about 50 things to do, if not more. First off, right-click and do Report Timing. That will break out the failing paths in detail. Some things to look at: - Are the clocks synchronous to each other? (It may be a false path if they are not) - Is the setup relatiosnhip correct? - Is the clock skew small? (If it's not, you may have a clock skew problem rather than a long data path delay issue) Once those are checked, it now comes to analyzing the datapath, in that it is too long to meet timing. It's hard to comment without seeing more.Honored ContributorThanks. What I did was, I right clicked on the violated path and selected "Set Multi-cycle" [between clock nodes] and set the multicycle number to the most negative slack shown in the report. This got rid of the error [Changed from Red to Black] Is this the right way to do it ?
Honored ContributorMost likely it is not.
1) Is this path really a multicycle setup, i.e. was it designed so that when the source register launches data, it won't be captured until two latch cycles later? If not, you've loosened the timing requirements so it passes timing but the hardware will fail. 2) If it is correct, did you add a multicycle hold to prevent the hold requirement from following the setup(explained in the User Guide I put together)?Honored ContributorUmm...no it wasn't a multicycle setup. Okay I will think about this. I have another question. It is already posted in "Question about Monitor" [the last message in this thread is my question about IO pins]. Can you take a look at it. I dont want to re-post it here.
Honored ContributorI came across the document you have created about TQ Analyzer. Thanks! It definitely cleared some of my doubts
