From: andrew.bridger@paragon.co.nz (Andrew Bridger) Newsgroups: comp.arch.fpga Subject: ChipScope ILA, cable requirements Date: 10 Apr 2002 15:34:29 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 30 Message-ID: <7939158e.0204101434.3c7bb138@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 210.55.57.74 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1018478069 12051 127.0.0.1 (10 Apr 2002 22:34:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Apr 2002 22:34:29 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch comp.arch.fpga:16425 Hi, I am trying to seek clarification on which cable (MultiLINX or Parallel Cable III) is required in order to use ChipScope ILA. I looked through the ChipScope manual (UG005 / PN 0401884 (v4.2) March 22, 2002) and found the following excerpt. "The ChipScope Analyzer tool can use either the MultiLINX, Parallel Cable III, or Parallel Cable IV cables to communicate with the target devices in the Boundary Scan chain of the board-under-test." So that sounds like I can use either. But then later on it says the following, "The ChipScope Analyzer supports the Xilinx MultiLINX™, Parallel Cable III and Parallel Cable IV download cables for communication between the PC and FPGA(s). The MultiLINX cable supports both USB (Windows 98 and Windows 2000) and RS-232 serial communication from the PC (see Figure 1-1, page 2). The Parallel Cable III and Parallel Cable IV cables support only parallel port communication from the PC to the Boundary Scan chain." Which sounds like the parallel cable only supports communication in the PC -> FPGA direction, so how does the captured data get sent back to the PC? Are there any limitations (apart from speed) in using the parallel cable rather than the multilinx cable? Regards Andrew ###### Reply-To: "Steve Casselman" From: "Steve Casselman" Newsgroups: comp.arch.fpga References: <7939158e.0204101434.3c7bb138@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: ChipScope ILA, cable requirements Lines: 11 Organization: Virtual Computer Corporation X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: <4L3t8.3136$lM5.1413029088@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.174.106.246 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr14.news.prodigy.com 1018480704 ST000 64.174.106.246 (Wed, 10 Apr 2002 19:18:24 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 19:18:24 EDT X-UserInfo1: SCSYASBEQJUMA]DYMBCD^VX@WB]^PCPDLXUNNHLHEQR@ETUCCNSKQFCY@TXDX_WHSVB]ZEJLSNY\^J[CUVSA_QLFC^RQHUPH[P[NRWCCMLSNPOD_ESALHUK@TDFUZHBLJ\XGKL^NXA\EVHSP[D_C^B_^JCX^W]CHBAX]POG@SSAZQ\LE[DCNMUPG_VSC@VJM Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:18:24 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!diablo.netcom.net.uk!netcom.net.uk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!207.115.63.138!newscon04.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr14.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch comp.arch.fpga:16364 I don't know if they support it or not but I've been able to do readback using the parallel cable III. Steve > Which sounds like the parallel cable only supports communication in > the PC -> FPGA direction, so how does the captured data get sent back > to the PC? ###### From: jason.moore@xilinx.com (Jason Moore) Newsgroups: comp.arch.fpga Subject: Re: ChipScope ILA, cable requirements Date: 10 Apr 2002 21:11:05 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 41 Message-ID: References: <7939158e.0204101434.3c7bb138@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 149.199.60.203 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1018498265 21992 127.0.0.1 (11 Apr 2002 04:11:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Apr 2002 04:11:05 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch comp.arch.fpga:16447 Hi Andrew, You can use the Parallel Cable for Chipscope. I use it to demonstrate the functionality of the tool and nearly all of my customers use it instead of MultiLinx. It supports the transfer of data in both directions PC -> FPGA and FPGA -> PC. As you said the only difference is speed. Thanks Jason andrew.bridger@paragon.co.nz (Andrew Bridger) wrote in message news:<7939158e.0204101434.3c7bb138@posting.google.com>... > Hi, > I am trying to seek clarification on which cable (MultiLINX or > Parallel Cable III) is required in order to use ChipScope ILA. I > looked through the ChipScope manual (UG005 / PN 0401884 (v4.2) March > 22, 2002) and found the following excerpt. > > "The ChipScope Analyzer tool can use either the MultiLINX, Parallel > Cable III, or Parallel Cable IV cables to communicate with the target > devices in the Boundary Scan chain of the board-under-test." > > So that sounds like I can use either. But then later on it says the > following, > > "The ChipScope Analyzer supports the Xilinx MultiLINX™, Parallel Cable > III and Parallel Cable IV download cables for communication between > the PC and FPGA(s). The MultiLINX cable supports both USB (Windows 98 > and Windows 2000) and RS-232 serial communication from the PC (see > Figure 1-1, page 2). The Parallel Cable III and Parallel Cable IV > cables support only parallel port communication from the PC to the > Boundary Scan chain." > > Which sounds like the parallel cable only supports communication in > the PC -> FPGA direction, so how does the captured data get sent back > to the PC? > > Are there any limitations (apart from speed) in using the parallel > cable rather than the multilinx cable? > > Regards > Andrew