[cRIO] FPGA compile time

Hello, I was wondering the normal time for LabVIEW to compile a program for cRIO FPGA target.
It has been taking 15 minutes per compile. I was wondering whether this is normal or whether there
is something I could do to make it faster. 
- Thank you 

This is the compile report of the code I am working with:
Status: Compilation successful.
Compilation Summary
Logic Utilization:
  Number of Slice Flip Flops:       5,531 out of  40,960   13%
  Number of 4 input LUTs:           5,475 out of  40,960   13%
Device Utilization Summary:
   Number of BUFGMUXs                        2 out of 8      25%
      Number of LOCed BUFGMUXs               1 out of 2      50%
   Number of External IOBs                 164 out of 333    49%
      Number of LOCed IOBs                 164 out of 164   100%
   Number of MULT18X18s                     14 out of 40     35%
   Number of Slices                       3874 out of 20480  18%
      Number of SLICEMs                      4 out of 10240   1%
Clock Rates: (Requested rates are adjusted for jitter and accuracy)
  Base clock: 40 MHz Onboard Clock
      Requested Rate:      40.408938MHz
      Theoretical Maximum: 54.191730MHz
  Base clock: MiteClk (Used by non-diagram components)
      Requested Rate:      33.037101MHz
      Theoretical Maximum: 61.406202MHz
Start Time: 9/18/2008 12:13:18 PM
End Time: 9/18/2008 12:29:22 PM
This is the compile report if I delete most of the code.
It only has a while loop and I/O pin read and write, and an inverter.
[Screenshot]
Status: Compilation successful.
Compilation Summary
Logic Utilization:
  Number of Slice Flip Flops:         583 out of  40,960    1%
  Number of 4 input LUTs:           1,021 out of  40,960    2%
Device Utilization Summary:
   Number of BUFGMUXs                        2 out of 8      25%
      Number of LOCed BUFGMUXs               1 out of 2      50%
   Number of External IOBs                 164 out of 333    49%
      Number of LOCed IOBs                 164 out of 164   100%
   Number of Slices                        671 out of 20480   3%
      Number of SLICEMs                      4 out of 10240   1%
Clock Rates: (Requested rates are adjusted for jitter and accuracy)
  Base clock: 40 MHz Onboard Clock
      Requested Rate:      40.408938MHz
      Theoretical Maximum: 85.113627MHz
  Base clock: MiteClk (Used by non-diagram components)
      Requested Rate:      33.037101MHz
      Theoretical Maximum: 70.566650MHz
Start Time: 9/18/2008 2:00:03 PM
End Time: 9/18/2008 2:12:19 PM

Similar Messages

  • How can I reduce FPGA compiler time

    Hi,
    I am trying to implement a PID control loop on the FPGA of a cRIO. 
    The VI which runs on the FPGA target takes very long to compile (1h+).
    Does anyone have an idea while the compilation takes so long and how I might be able to inprove compilation time?
    The program can be found in attachment.
    Best regards,
    Jasper
    Attachments:
    PID FPGA TEST.zip ‏160 KB

    Hi Jasper,
    FPGA's normally take a very long time to compile compared to software compilations. 1 hour sounds about right for a slightly above average sized project. Compile times of anywhere from 2-4 hours (and longer for larger devices!) are not unheard of.
    Companies who are serious about FPGA compilation and rely on quick turnaround invest in servers which contain many computers to work on the compilation (this is also why when you compile, it asks you if you would like to compile on the "local sever" (your computer) or an external server).
    NI also has a cloud compiler available that will let you compile your code on their servers, however you must pay for the time. I think they offer a free trial if you wanted to see how it works.
    So if you seriously need quick turnaround, you must consider some serious hardware.
    Otherwise, you will have to queue up multiple compilations and let them run overnight like the rest of us.  
    www.movimed.com - Custom Imaging Solutions

  • Long FPGA compilation time ( 30 hrs)

    I am writing some small test programs to check a PXI-7831R FPGA card.
    One program is a FOR loop inside a WHILE loop with a single AI read. I run the FOR 1000 times, then output a 1000-element array of 16-bit AI values through auto-indexing. This program compiled for 31 hours and 15 minutes before I aborted.
    Is there a reason for such a long compile time (too large an array)?
    Are there certain programming architectures that I should avoid on FPGA (e.g., nested loops)?
    I am running LVRT7.1 on a PXI-8145RT. There is also a 7350 motion board installed, though not used in this program.
    Thanks.
    Laine

    I've read somewhere in the FPGA documentation that arrays in FPGA applications should be limited to 32 elements. The consume a large amount of space on the chip, so you need to be careful when using them.
    Ed
    Ed Dickens - Certified LabVIEW Architect - DISTek Integration, Inc. - NI Certified Alliance Partner
    Using the Abort button to stop your VI is like using a tree to stop your car. It works, but there may be consequences.

  • Crio FPGA Compiling error

    Hello All,
    I've run into a compiling error that has me stumped. I'm using labview 8.5.1, NRIO 2.4.0, and FPGA 8.5.1 on a CRIO-9014 & 9104. When compiling the code attached I get the following error:
    Analyzing generic Entity <bushold> in library <work> (Architecture <rtl>).
    ERROR:Xst:807 - "C:/NIFPGA85/srvrTmp/LOCALH~1/PLANEV~1/bushold.vhd" line 1541: arguments of 'or' operator must have same lengths.
    -->
    Total memory usage is 546644 kilobytes
    Number of errors   :    1 (   0 filtered)
    Number of warnings :  540 (   0 filtered)
    Number of infos    :    2 (   0 filtered)
    ERROR:Xflow - Program xst returned error code 6. Aborting flow execution...
    My best guess is this error has something to do with the metafiles generated by labview before final compilation into the FPGA bitstream. I've tried tweaking the code here and there and haven't found the source of the error yet. I'm going to go through with disable blocks and see where the error lies.
    Anyone else run into something like this? I could use some help.
    Attachments:
    FPGA Code.zip ‏1354 KB

    Hi mmalluck,
    Clusters of 1D arrays are supported in LabVIEW FPGA.  I was able to compile a small VI with code similar to yours - a for loop with four autoindexed tunnels bundled into a cluster. 
    I am not entirely sure why separating the arrays eliminated that error, but I am glad to hear that your program compiles now. 
    Jennifer R.
    National Instruments
    Applications Engineer

  • CRIO FPGA Compilation Error : xilinx 21955

    Hi all,
    I tried to compiled my first "real" application today, and how unexpected in the NI world: it didn't work !
    I got myself a nice error message from xilinx :
    Regenerating IP...
    ERROR:coreutil - Failure to set parameters on core: Illegal combination: Port A
       Width and Port A Depth
    ERROR:coreutil - Failure to generate output products
    ERROR:coreutil - An error occurred while running Java. Please examine the
       console or coregen log file for a specific IP related error.
       If there is no specific error the problem may be due to memory limitations.
       For more information please consult solution record 21955 available from:
       http://www.xilinx.com/xlnx/xil_ans_display.jsp?getPagePath=21955Finished Regenerating.
    ERROR:sim:57 - Error found during generation
    The xilinx page did not help me so far, and I don't find any reference of the "Illegal combination: Port A Width and Port A Depth" error which is probably the key to my situation.
    The app. is not so complex (yet) and make some use of the "Memory" objects... maybe it's about that.
    Anyway, I'll welcome any observation, advice (or solution) ;-)

    Hi all,
               I think i am facing with a similar error...
    My error description is:
    Release 8.1.03i - Xilinx CORE Generator IP_I.20
    Copyright (c) 1995-2005 Xilinx, Inc.  All rights reserved.
    Regenerating IP...
    occurred during initialization of Vnot reserve enough space for object heanot create the Java virtual machineERROR:coreutil - An error occurred while running Java. Please examine the
       console or coregen log file for a specific IP related error.
       If there is no specific error the problem may be due to memory limitations.
       For more information please consult solution record 21955 available from:
       http://www.xilinx.com/xlnx/xil_ans_display.jsp?getPagePath=21955Finished Regenerating.
    I cant find any help with the above link... Can any help me in this issue...??

  • What is the maximum number of the parallel blocks or maximum pair of shift register used in FPGA VI time loop with cRIO 9104?

      I am writing a FPGA VI with module cRIO 9104, I need to do a lot of parallel execution of inside a timed loop. In total, I have used 20 pairs of shift registers in the timed loop, which simply means there is 20 parallel exceution across ONE time loop. However, it tells me that there is an over-used of the FPGA resources in the compliation report. One is the Slices and the other is the number 4 of LUTS ( see the attached file), would the compile will be sucessful if I change it to ALL block diagrams cascaded in series without using any shift register accross the timed loop? And do you think that it is reaosnable to have 20 pairs of shift register arranged in parallel inside a timed loop.
      Thank you!
    Attachments:
    afternoon912.jpg ‏2305 KB

    Your compilation report has 2 useful numbers to help answer your question, I'll summarize:
    Number of Slice Flip Flops = 27%
    Number of 4 Input LUT's = 100% *
    You are using the Timed Loop Shift registers to pass a value from one iteration of your loop to the next.  The LabVIEW FPGA compiler will use Slice Flip Flops to create this behavior in the FPGA fabric.  You are only using 27% of the Flip Flops, therefore the 20 Shift Registers are not your problem. 
    LUT's (Look Up Tables), which are the basic logic building block of an FPGA, are your problem.  You are using over 100% of the LUT's in this FPGA.  To fit in this FPGA you will have to reduce the amount of logic (and/or gates, additions, comparisons, etc.) in your design.
    -RB

  • Compilation time - LabVIEW FPGA project

    I am trying to compile a LabVIEW FPGA project over NI PXIe-1071 chassis.
    My problem briefly lies in the compilation time which last hours while only takes approximately 20 minutes on another chassis I am having with exactly the same specifications.
    Is there any project settings I should check which may casuing this problem ?
    Thanks.

    The FPGA boards exactly the same and the VI is exactly the same? All you are changing is the chassis? R Series or FlexRIO? What version of LabVIEW FPGA? How much are the designs "filled up" (like what is the percent utilization of slices)? There are project settings for effort levels of the Xilinx tools depending on what version of LabVIEW you are using. 

  • FPGA compile error

    Good Afternoon,
    I am getting a compile server error that I do not know how to track down. The server is set up and working fine (LV 8.6 cRIO, FPGA) I can send over on FPGA file and it compiles fine. When the second is sent, the compile request is received and starts, but a quickly get the following pop-up:
    "Status: Compilation failed due to a Compile Server error.
    Regenerating IP...
    ERROR:coreutil - Failure to set parameters on core: Illegal combination: Port A
       Width and Port A Depth
    ERROR:coreutil - Failure to generate output products
    ERROR:coreutil - An error occurred while running Java. Please examine the
       console or coregen log file for a specific IP related error.
       If there is no specific error the problem may be due to memory limitations.
       For more information please consult solution record 21955 available from:
       http://www.xilinx.com/xlnx/xil_ans_display.jsp?getPagePath=21955Finished Regenerating.
    ERROR:sim:57 - Error found during generation
    Start Time: 2/17/2009 10:22:28 PM
    End Time: 2/17/2009 10:22:54 PM"
    I am aware that something is amiss in my FPGA VI, but I am unsure what the above messages are telling me to look at. Any ideas? It was working/compiling, but I changed the cRIO backplane configuration, removing some inputs and adding different ones.
    Message Edited by Mellobuck on 02-17-2009 09:51 AM
    Data Science Automation
    CTA, CLA, CPI
    SHAZAM!
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.
    Attachments:
    FPGA error.JPG ‏63 KB

    Xilinx doesn't support a depth of 1. If possible
    carry on using a depth of 8 or use some other "register" to hold the
    value such as locals, globals, fifos, feedback nodes, etc. Have a look at the following:
    Why Won't FPGA Code with a Memory Depth of 1 Compile?
    Adnan Zafar
    Certified LabVIEW Architect
    Coleman Technologies

  • LV FPGA compilation problem (urgent)

    Hi,
    I am trying to implment a LV FPGA code in my crio 9074 but it is taking unsusually long time(40 mins and up).
    I am trying to implement this example to generate a waveform:   http://www.ni.com/example/28209/en/  
    Till now it is showing "generating cores" message and in the log I am getting repeatedly this message:
    aved CGP file for project 'coregen'.
    Resolving generics for 'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'...
    Applying external generics to 'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'...
    Delivering associated files for 'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'...
    Generating implementation netlist for
    'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'...
    Running synthesis for 'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'
    Release 13.4 - Xilinx CORE Generator O.87xd (nt)
    Copyright (c) 1995-2011 Xilinx, Inc. All rights reserved.
    All runtime messages will be recorded in
    C:\NIFPGA\jobs\W543T9Q_a5T1mXb\coregen.log
    Saved CGP file for project 'coregen'.
    Resolving generics for 'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'...
    Applying external generics to 'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'...
    Delivering associated files for 'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'...
    Generating implementation netlist for
    'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'...
    Running synthesis for 'ReallyLongUniqueName_ReallyLongUniqueName'
    It seems that is in some kind of endless loop. Peae guide me how to solve the issue. 
    Thanks ..
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.

    Those are "normal" output messages from the compilation process (although they are somewhat curious). It is normal to have a number of these modules in the FPGA design if you are using the analysis library functions; each one can take several minutes to synthesize. Did the compile eventually finish?
    Luckily, if you make only minor changes in subsequent compiles the compile times should decrease as the compiled results from each of these components is cached.

  • Compilation Time für Compilierung mit AI Modul dauert unverhältnissmäßig lange

    Hallo Zusammen,
    ich hatte ein umfangreiches Project, welches auf einem cRIO 9074 mit den Modulen 9215 und 9401. Die Compilierung dauert ca 10 Minuten und alles lief einwandfrei.
    Nachdem ich zusätzlich das Modul 9222 hinzugefügt habe dauerte die Compilierung auf einmal 1,5 Stunden. Die Compilierung läuft zwar durch aber ich bekomme in den Logfiles 44000 mal die gleiche WARNING:
    WARNING:NgdBuild:452 - logical net
       'window/theVI/n_NiFpgaAG_00000000_WhileLoop_Diagram/n_NiFpgaAG_00000014_Seque
       nceFrame_Diagram/n_SubVI_FPGA_CAL_TriggerFire_vi_28/n_SubVICtlOrIndOpt/data<4
       92>' has no driver
    mit folgender Zusammenfassung:
      No Partitions were found in this design.
    NGDBUILD Design Results Summary:
      Number of errors:     0
      Number of warnings: 44191
    Writing NGD file "toplevel_gen.ngd" ...
    Total REAL time to NGDBUILD completion: 29 min  39 sec
    Total CPU time to NGDBUILD completion:  1 min  50 sec
    Writing NGDBUILD log file "toplevel_gen.bld"...
    NGDBUILD done.
    Bevor das Modul drin war sah dieser Teil in den Logfiles so aus:
      No Partitions were found in this design.
    NGDBUILD Design Results Summary:
      Number of errors:     0
      Number of warnings:  50
    Writing NGD file "toplevel_gen.ngd" ...
    Total REAL time to NGDBUILD completion:  11 sec
    Total CPU time to NGDBUILD completion:   12 sec
    Writing NGDBUILD log file "toplevel_gen.bld"...
    NGDBUILD done.
    Das ganze hat mich stutzig gemacht und ich habe viele Varianten getestet um herrauszufinden wieso die Compilierung jetzt auf einmal so lange dauert.
    - Wenn ich das Programm unverändert lasse und lediglich im Projekt das AI Modul 9222 hinzufüge bekomme ich die Warnings und die Compilierung dauert ewig
    - Wenn ich das AI Modul im Projekt hinzufüge und die Eingänge in einem sehr einfachen zusätzlichen Loop abfrage kommen die selben Warnings und die Compilierung dauert auch ewig.
    - Wenn ich den Loop wieder entferne und die Module wieder aus dem Projekt entferne dauert die Dauer der Compilierung immernoch so lange und die Warnings bleiben.
    Das Projekt ist sozusagen kapput wenn einmal das 9222 drin war. Nur wenn ich ein neues Projekt anlege und die VIs und Mods (außer 9222) wieder hinzufüge bekomme ich die Warnings los und die Compilierung dauert wie immer 10 min.
    Wenn ich das Ganze mit dem Modul 9223 ausprobiere passiert das gleiche. Compiliere ich das selbe Programm auf für PXI-System und nicht für ein cRIO-System mit den gleichen Modulen bekomme ich auch keine Warnings und die Compilation Time ist schnell.
    Varriation in den Xilinx Options bringen nur eine sehr kleine Zeitoptimierung.
    Die Compilierung läuft zwar durch und das Programm funktioniert aber die langen Wartezeiten sind mir nicht erklärlich. Ich weiß dass FPGA Compilierung eine komplizierte Angelegenheit ist, aber allen durch die beschriebenen Änderungen im Programm sehe ich keinen Grund für einen solch enormen Anstieg der Compilation Time.
    Da ich das Programm mittels HIL testen muss bringt mir die Ausführung auf dem Developement System auch nichts. Das heißt ich muss bei jeder Programmänderung neu Compilieren und jedesmal 1,5 h warten.
    Wäre super wenn mir jemand helfen könnte!
    Vielen Dank schonmal!!!

    Hallo Abduelkerim,
    Bezüglich dem Compilieren: Ich kompiliere die FPGA Programme immer mit Xilinx auf meinem Windows-Rechner.
    Das "fehlerhafte" Compilieren ensteht nur wenn ich als FPGA-Target mein cRIO wähle. Wähle ich ein PXI mit dem selben Code entstehen keine Probleme beim Compilieren.
    Ich hab jetzt mal mein FPGA-File mit dem Projekt ohne NI9222 compiliert und anschließend im Vergleich genau das gleiche mit NI9222 im Projekt. Ich habe das Modul jedoch nicht in meinem FPGA-File verwendet. Die einzige Änderung ist das hinzugefügte NI9222 im Projekt. Wie auf den Screenshots schön zu sehen weicht jedoch die Compilation-Time enorm ab!
    Attachments:
    schnell.jpg ‏224 KB
    langsam.jpg ‏220 KB

  • Is it true that bundle by name can cause FPGA compiles to fail?

    Dear forum,
    I have attached a full log of my experience with this apparent bug, but I will summarize it here:
    I attempted to compile a labview robotics project for cRIO 9074. The code was all on the FPGA, and I'd tested it all before attempting to compile--much of it was skeleton code proving that the self test system would turn on blinky lights on the front panel. My first attempted compile received a strange failure message in stage 3 of labview's pre-xilinx compilation interface, and the message was strange mostly because it was so intensely vague. It read "An internal software error has occurred. Please contact National Instruments technical support at ni.com/support with the following information: Error 1000 occurred at an unidentified location. Possible reason(s): LabVIEW:  The VI is not in a state compatible with this operation."
    It being Tuesday the 6th of July 2010, I was unable to reach either the support staff who were on holiday or the web service, which was down for maintenance, so I began disabling pieces of my code using my debugging conditional disable statements. Eventually I found one skeletal code module, one to interface with analog flood sensors, which did not fail to compile. I compared this with another skeletal code module which did fail to compile, and after several tests noticed that adding a bundle by name from a strict type definition (but not an un-bundle by name or a standard anonymous bundle) would cause the vi to fail the compile. With several more tests I confirmed that while the vi would fail to compile with the bbn, with a standard bundle it would compile successfully all the way to the xilinx stage (by which point I didn't care, the bug was definitively pre-xilinx.) 
    So tonight I will be going into my code and doing a lot of replacing bundle by name blocks with anonymous bundles, but I am still haunted by the extreme vagueness of the error, and by the fact that bundle by name is usually a solid part of the FPGA development platform. It was clearly intended to work. Why didn't it?
    Gray Cortright Thomas
    Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering
    Engineering: Robotics
    Class of 2012
    Needham, MA
    Gray Cortright Thomas
    Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering
    Engineering: Robotics
    Class of 2012
    Needham, MA
    Attachments:
    gtlog2010-07-06-18-24-00.txt ‏7 KB

    So I did as Donovan suggested, and this worked for the code example which I posted. But when I started trying to put more of the bundle by names back in this solution stopped working. I then went on to solve a seemingly unrelated problem with the version that had compiled using only anonymous bundle: it had been unable to run some while loops that were in subvis. When I took the code from these subvis and put the loops on the back panel of the main vi, to my utter horror, they began to function again in the compile (running on the hardware). I was afraid that it was subvis themselves that were causing this failure to run, but was relieved when my next test proved this not to be the case: I took that loop on the front panel where it worked and used edit>create subvi to put it in a subvi. It still worked. Thus I was left to search out the difference between the subvi that successfully compiled, and the subvi which compiled but didn't run--and this was that the failed subvi was part of a library. I placed the new, working, subvi in the same library and the code once again displayed the same symptoms as when it had been tested the first time: the loop would not run even once and the flow of control would never finish with the loop--it just delayed forever. This might be a problem with the way I had used the libraries, but I think everything within them was public. My guess now it that the Libraries don't behave the same way they do on the FPGA as they do on the FPGA simulator, and this is why the vis seemed to work when I simulated them. So... I took all the vis, typedefs, and globals out of the libraries and into virtual folders of the same name and... Everything works! Even bundle by name!
    The implementation of project libraries in the FPGA compiler may be suboptimal in some respects, but I probed only as deep as necessary to run my code.
    And this code is in 7z format because my zip file did not meet the maximum file size requirements of the forum.
    It is also very possible that I misunderstood the functioning of the libraries, and the FPGA simulator was blowing sunshine up my nose when it showed them working properly in simulation. Either way, it is probably worth looking into. This weekend I might try to find the simplest project file that shows these symptoms just to prove I'm not crazy.
    Gray Cortright Thomas
    Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering
    Engineering: Robotics
    Class of 2012
    Needham, MA

  • Fpga compilation xilinx error 'Process "Map" failed' - 'unroutable situation'

    When I try to compile a Labview fpga project on our new system, it fails with the following error summary (the full Xilinx log is attached):
    LabVIEW FPGA: The compilation failed due to a xilinx error.
    Details:
    ERROR:LIT:536 - IBUF symbol "aUserGpio<1>_IBUF" (output
    signal=aUserGpio<1>_IBUF) has the attribute IOBDELAY set to value NONE and it
    is driving an IODELAY. If the IOBDELAY attribute is on the driving PAD, it
    has precedence over the IBUF one. Either the constraint or the design need
    modification to prevent an unroutable situation.
    Errors found during logical drc.
    Design Summary
    Number of errors : 1
    Number of warnings : 349
    Process "Map" failed
    Start Time: 10:31:49 AM
    End Time: 10:55:32 AM
    Total Time: 00:23:43
    Hardware:
    NI PXIe-1071 Chassis
    NI PXIe-8108 Embedded controller
    NI PXIe-7965R FPGA FlexRIO FPGA module
    NI 5761 250 MS/s 14 bit Analog input digitizer
    Installed software:
    Labview 2011 version 11.0
    Labview FPGA module 11.0.0
    FPGA compilation tools (Xilinx12_4)
    NI FlexRIO Adapter Module Support 2.2.0
    NI-RIO 4.0 (FlexRIO 2.1.0)
    Xilinx DRAM compilation bug fix patch from NI article id 5E4FNCDP
    Xilinx clock bug fix patch from NI article id 5GFAB7DP
    replaces c:\NIFPGA\programs\Xilinx11_5\ISE\xilinx\lib\nt\libPlXil_Clocks.dll; The installed version is c:\NIFPGA\programs\Xilinx12_4-> Manually copied the dll to the installed version
    The Project uses the 5761 low speed clip and a DRAM FIFO.
    I tried to compile it before installing any patch, after installing the DRAM patch, and after installing both patches and always got a Xilinx error after ~10 minutes compile time. The error summary shown above and the attached Xilinx log are from compiling with both patches installed.
    It compiled correctly on our older system:
    Hardware:
    NI PXIe-1082 Chassis
    NI PXIe-8133 Embedded controller
    NI PXIe-7965R FPGA FlexRIO FPGA module
    NI 5761 250 MS/s 14 bit Analog input digitizer
    Installed software:
    Labview2011version10.0.0
    LabviewFPGAmodule10.0.0
    FPGAcompilationtools (Xilinx11_5)
    NIFlexRIOAdapterModuleSupport2.1.0
    NI-RIO3.5.1 (FlexRIO1.5.0)
    XilinxDRAMcompilationbugfixpatchfromNIarticleid5E4FNCDP
    Any help / suggestions greatly appreciated,
    Fabrizio
    Attachments:
    XilinxLog.txt ‏1482 KB

    Hi Torpedotown, 
    Can you tell me what version of FlexRIO Adapter Module Support you are using? 
    The 5761 Low Speed CLIP has a constraint that doesn't work properly with some versions of the compilation tools.  In order to solve this you should be able to upgrade to our latest version of FAM support, or go change the constraint manually.  
    For the latest version of FAM support, go to http://ni.com/info and enter code "famsoftware"
    If you've modified constraint files before and feel comfortable doing it yourself, let me know and I can provide you with the details on how to do that. 
    Thanks!
    National Instruments
    FlexRIO & R-Series Product Support Engineer

  • FPGA: compilation error: size of concat operation is different than size of the target

    Today I got an error, for which I couldn't find a solution.
    I use the PXI-7813R FPGA, with Xilinx tools 10.1
    At compilation, the error I get is:
    Compilation failed due to a Xilinx error.
    Details:
    ERROR:HDLParsers:804 - "C:/NIFPGA/jobs/TESY1S8_X4PR8hn/NiFpgaAG_000000ce_CaseStructureFrame_0000.vhd" Line 301. Size of concat operation is different than size of the target.
    ERROR:HDLParsers:804 - "C:/NIFPGA/jobs/TESY1S8_X4PR8hn/NiFpgaAG_000000ce_CaseStructureFrame_0000.vhd" Line 372. Size of concat operation is different than size of the target.
    --> 
    Total memory usage is 185944 kilobytes
    Number of errors   :    2 (   0 filtered)
    Number of warnings :    0 (   0 filtered)
    Number of infos    :    0 (   0 filtered)
    Process "Synthesis" failed
    Start Time: 18:25:26
    End Time: 18:28:54
    Total Time: 00:03:27
    What can cause a concat size difference?

    This is by the way the configuration:
    Project: FPGAWrapperMG100125AOD.lvproj
    Target: FPGA Target (RIO0, PXI-7813R)
    Build Specification: fpga_integrator_AOD_random_access
    Top level VI: fpga_integrator_AOD_random_access.vi
    Compiling on LabVIEW FPGA Compile Cloud Service
    Compilation Tool: Xilinx 10.1
    Start Time: 05.07.2011 19:06:12
    Run when loaded to Fpga: FALSE
    Xilinx Options
    Design Strategy: Custom
    Synthesis Optimization Goal: Area
    Synthesis Optimization Effort: Normal
    Map Overall Effort Level: Default Xilinx setting
    Place and Route Overall Effort Level: High
    JobId: FNW72uPWorking Directory: C:\NIFPGA\compilation\FPGAWrapperMG100_FPGATarget_fpgaintegratorAO_9D5B4237
    The Xilinx log is attached.
    Attachments:
    XilinxLog.txt ‏80 KB

  • Why is the FPGA compiler server so slow?

    FPGA Cloud compiler is faster because NI servers are high performance, right????
    Well, my Windows 7 PC is high performance, but no luck there!
    Total CPU usage is never more than 25% and total memory usage (including other applications) is less than 16%.
    Why does the compile server not use all available resources? has it been restricted?
    How can I leverage more power from my PC?
    If NI Servers can compile code quicker, there must be plausible explanation / reason?
    Please advise, how to make the compile server run faster locally?
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.

    Try this if you haven't yet:
    http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-FPGA-Idea-Exchange/Turbo-Boost-the-speed-of-FPGA-compiles-under-Wind...
    In my experience, taking advantage of Intel's Turbo Boost (my PC has i5) reduced compile time from 85 minutes to 45.
    I'm currently testing Cloud Compiler and it took 110 minutes.  How can Cloud Compile Server be the slowest compile?

  • FPGA compilation not completing.- Generating Cores

    When i compile my FPGA code I get the above window and will be in the same status for more than 10 hrs and still no progress and no  errors are thrown by the compiler. I have tried with different Design strategy like Balanced, minimum time  etc

    What version of LV? OS?
    Has FPGA compilation ever worked on this computer? 
    For test purposes, have you tried compiling a very simple FPGA VI? Does this happen with any VI you try to compile?
    Can you tell by looking at the task monitor whether the compiler is still actively doing something (consuming CPU cycles) after 10 hours?
    Mike...
    Certified Professional Instructor
    Certified LabVIEW Architect
    LabVIEW Champion
    "... after all, He's not a tame lion..."
    Be thinking ahead and mark your dance card for NI Week 2015 now: TS 6139 - Object Oriented First Steps

Maybe you are looking for

  • RFKQSE10 - Witholding tax report (Spain)

    Hello, We are analyzing SAP standard report RFKQSE10 and we have found something we don´t understand. Vendor open items are stored in BSIK table and closed open items in BSAK table. Debugging the program we have seen that the report is only using BSI

  • CS6 Master Suite Trial Issues Getting Started

    Hi, I am both a Macbook andCS newbie  ;-) I've had a nightmare first downloading the Adobe CS Download Assistant and now the actual software. It has put Adobe CS6 folders in my Finder, but they seem to be empty and I can't open them. Can anyone help

  • Using Jar file images with READ_IMAGE_FILE built-in

    Hello, I was wondering if it is possible to utilize images in a JAR file with the READ_IMAGE_FILE built-in. The Oracle Forms Configuration guide seems to indicate that I should be able to do this by using 'URL' with READ_IMAGE_FILE but no success so

  • Parallel Flow invokes async services with incorrect parameters

    Hi I'm calling an async service using 2 partnerlinks in a parallel flow. The input variables are being assigned correctly but one of the invokes is using the wrong values. The problem appears to be around the use of a shared variable (Invoke_initiate

  • ABAP WD: Fully expand a Tree

    Hi all, I'm having a very hard time achieving the following: I would like to FULLY EXPAND a WD tree in code. Allthough it sounds easy i dont get it to work. What have i tried allready: - the 'Expanded' property of the treenode at designtime. - if_wd_