From: "E. Napoli" Newsgroups: comp.arch.fpga Subject: XNF vs. EDIF Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 12:13:37 +0200 Organization: C.D.S. Centro di Servizi Didattico Scientifico Lines: 11 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.225.233.235 X-Trace: news.unina.it 1030701540 30715 143.225.233.235 (30 Aug 2002 09:59:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.unina.it NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Aug 2002 09:59:00 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsmi-eu.news.garr.it!newsrm.news.garr.it!NewsITBone-GARR!news.unina.it!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch comp.arch.fpga:20447 Is there a difference between EDIF and XNF outside the syntax? I mean, are they always exchangeable at the same point of the design flow? Why should I use XNF instead of EDIF? Thanks for your attention in advance, ENapoli ###### From: Vikram Pasham Newsgroups: comp.arch.fpga Subject: Re: XNF vs. EDIF Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 10:10:29 -0500 Organization: Xilinx, Inc. Lines: 22 Message-ID: <3D6F8AE5.DCADE176@xilinx.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 149.199.212.156 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!enews.sgi.com!nntp.wetware.com!attdv1!ip.att.net!newsgate.xilinx.com!cliff.xsj.xilinx.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch comp.arch.fpga:20443 XNF (Xilinx Netlist Format) and EDIF (Electronic Design Interchange Format) are two different netlist formats and there is no significant advantage of one over the other. "Ngdbuild" can take either of these netlist formats and after that the design flow is same. EDIF is an industry standard and XNF is Xilinx's proprietary standard. Latest Xilinx tools only generate EDIF files. Further info on EDIF format can be found at www.edif.org. -Vikram "E. Napoli" wrote: > Is there a difference between EDIF and XNF outside the syntax? > I mean, are they always exchangeable at the same point of the design flow? > Why should I use XNF instead of EDIF? > > Thanks for your attention in advance, > > ENapoli ###### Reply-To: "Steve Casselman" From: "Steve Casselman" Newsgroups: comp.arch.fpga References: <3D6F8AE5.DCADE176@xilinx.com> Subject: Re: XNF vs. EDIF 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: NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.169.100.35 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com 1030722980 ST000 64.169.100.35 (Fri, 30 Aug 2002 11:56:20 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 11:56:20 EDT X-UserInfo1: OXYYR\OGQJT_SVH]^JKBOW@@YJ_ZTB\MV@BD]\YIJYWZUYICD^RAQBKZQTZTX\_I[^G_KGFNON[ZOE_AZNVO^\XGGNTCIRPIJH[@RQKBXLRZ@CD^HKANYVW@RLGEZEJN@\_WZJBNZYYKVIOR]T]MNMG_Z[YVWSCH_Q[GPC_A@CARQVXDSDA^M]@DRVUM@RBM Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 15:56:20 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr13.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!2ac7f5fa!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch comp.arch.fpga:20439 Xilinx went from XNF to XDL. XDL has all the routing pip information and is a more physical language then XNF. Steve >>Latest Xilinx tools only generate > EDIF files. Further info on EDIF format can be found at www.edif.org. ###### From: nweaver@ribbit.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Nicholas C. Weaver) Newsgroups: comp.arch.fpga Subject: Re: XNF vs. EDIF Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 16:13:04 +0000 (UTC) Organization: University of California, Berkeley, EECS Department Lines: 12 Message-ID: References: <3D6F8AE5.DCADE176@xilinx.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ribbit.cs.berkeley.edu X-Trace: agate.berkeley.edu 1030723984 47884 128.32.112.203 (30 Aug 2002 16:13:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 16:13:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001) Originator: nweaver@ribbit.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Nicholas C. Weaver) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.mailgate.org!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!agate.berkeley.edu!agate!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch comp.arch.fpga:20456 In article , Steve Casselman wrote: >Xilinx went from XNF to XDL. XDL has all the routing pip information and is >a more physical language then XNF. Well, more XNF was a format xilinx did largely before EDIF took off. Both are used to describe pre technology mapping netlists in the Xilinx flow. XDL is a post mapping, post placement, or post routing representation. -- Nicholas C. Weaver nweaver@cs.berkeley.edu