Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add ability to generate non-byte access by reg API #16

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

klevin92
Copy link

This commit adds ability to generate non-byte write/read transactions on AXI interface while using UVM register API.
Previously there were only byte transactions on the bus.

@taichi-ishitani
Copy link
Owner

Hi @klevin92 ,

Thank you for opening PR!

This uvm ral adapter is for AXI4-Lite and I think AX4-Lite does not support the narrow access feature.
Do you need to support normal AXI or AXI5-Lite?

@klevin92
Copy link
Author

klevin92 commented Jul 24, 2020

HI @taichi-ishitani!

If I understood you correctly it's not narrow access. If you try to run uvm_reg_hw_reset_seq or any other build-in sequence you will see only byte transactions disregard of your register's size. Which isn't right if you have, let's say, 4-byte registers.

I will come back in a few days and bring a test case for this situation.

And answering your questions - yes, I need normal AXI4.

@taichi-ishitani
Copy link
Owner

you will see only byte transactions disregard of your register's size

Yes, I know. To do byte transactions, I set supports_byte_enable property of the uvm reg adapter.

supports_byte_enable = 1;

I need normal AXI4

OK, I understood.
burst length also needs to be set to 1 to support normal AXI access.

@taichi-ishitani
Copy link
Owner

I will come back in a few days and bring a test case for this situation.

Thanks but I already have a sample TB to execute built-in RAL sequences.
https://github.com/rggen/rggen-sample-testbench

@taichi-ishitani
Copy link
Owner

I think more modifications to the uvm reg adapter are needed to support AXI4 access so I create an issue #17 instead of this PR.
Can you update #17 if you have more requirements and wait for me to implement that?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants