Hi David, There are two ways of providing a standardized interface for foreign routines, VHPI and DPI. The two approaches differ in their level of abstraction of the data, which has implications on the complexity (of use and implementation) and performance. As you know, we have so far taken the VHPI route because there is an existing framework in IEEE Std 1076-2008 to which we can define extensions. On the DPI side work has just started in the P1076 Working Group (see http://www.eda-twiki.org/cgi-bin/view.cgi/P1076/DpiProposal), but it has not progressed as far as what can be found in the SystemVerilog DPI. From a practical side, there are several issues to consider. The first is resources. We are already thin on the projects currently planned. It will become an question of priority to be addressed by the WG. The second issue is coordination with the P1076 DPI effort. This is important as P1076.1 should not develop this on its own. Thirdly, this would create a dependency of the of 1076.1 revision on the ongoing revision of 1076, which so far we have avoided. Finally, I have to investigate whether this dependency would require changes to our PAR. What I am leading up to is that a plan is required that addresses all these and probably other issues. You and I and others interested in this project should work together to understand what the implications are with an intent to creating such a plan. Only then will we be able to make a decision. Regards. Ernst Christen Chair, IEEE P1076.1 Working Group mailto:christen.1858@comcast.net On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 22:18:39 +0000, David Smith <David.Smith@synopsys.com> wrote: We are getting requests from customers requesting a standardized format for the interface to foreign routines. This is something that currently does not exist in the LRM and causes portability problems. I can foresee a solution that makes use of the Direct-C work done in SystemVerilog to provide a relatively low cost interface between the simulator and a routine written in C (or any language that support C compatible calling conventions). Is this something we can add to the work for the next VHDL-AMS? Regards David David W. Smith Synopsys Scientist Synopsys, Inc. Synopsys Technology Park 2025 NW Cornelius Pass Road Hillsboro, OR 97124 Voice: 503.547.6467 Main: 503.547.6000 Cell: 503.560.5389 FAX: 503.547.6906 Email: david.smith@synopsys.com http://www.synopsys.com Saber Accelerates Robust Design Predictable. Repeatable. Reliable. Proven. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. To unsubscribe to the vhdl-ams mailing list: mailto:Majordomo@eda.org?subject=Unsubscribe&body=unsubscribe%20vhdl-amsReceived on Wed Sep 26 10:33:01 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 26 2012 - 10:33:32 PDT