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

[BUG] build simple_system from top level Makefile fails #263

Closed
TiagoTeixeira-synthara opened this issue Apr 30, 2024 · 6 comments
Closed
Labels
question Further information is requested wontfix This will not be worked on

Comments

@TiagoTeixeira-synthara
Copy link

Bug Description

Building the simple_system example (from top-level Makefile make build-simple-system) fails due a missing dependency: cve2_pcounts (full name lowrisc_dv_verilator_cve2_pcounts).

simple_system <- simple_system_core <- cve2_pcounts (simplified names)

It seems that before the rename on #25 it was called ibex_pcounts, located under dv/verilator, but had been removed with issue #21 .

From looking around, and as documentation tells, verilator support was dropped in favor of core-v-verif. As a side node, perhaps it should be made clear that cv32e20 currently has its own branch on core-v-verif (cv32e20/dev)?

It seems then that the simple_system example is obsolete.

Is there a way to still be able to build/run the simple_system to/with verilator? (I imagine restoring the ibex_pcounts/cve2_pcounts files, maybe directly into the simple_system directory, would suffice.)

Should the example be dropped completely in favor of core-v-verif?

Thanks

@MikeOpenHWGroup MikeOpenHWGroup added question Further information is requested wontfix This will not be worked on labels Apr 30, 2024
@MikeOpenHWGroup
Copy link
Member

Thanks for this issue @TiagoTeixeira-synthara. As you probably know, the CVE2 is a fork of Ibex and we have no plans to support the simple-system. If you are planning to simulate this core it is best to use CORE-V-VERIF.

I will close this issue with a "wont-fix" label and create a task to ensure that we make a conscious decision about what to do with simple-system (and then update the directory tree and documentation to reflect that).

@MariaElenaDAgostino-synthara

Thank you @MikeOpenHWGroup, where can I find the definition of the vector table for the CVE2?

I am trying to use the same vector table of the CV32E40P, but something is not working.

Can you point me to the relevant documentation or a snippet of the tb code?

@MikeOpenHWGroup
Copy link
Member

Most CORE-V cores have User Manuals that are published on ReadTheDocs. From the GitHub repo you can find a link to it under the "About" section on the right-hand pane of the webpage. Better yet, follow this link. 😉

By the way, please do not read the RTL or TB code to figure out how any of the CORE-V cores work. If you cannot answer your question by reading the User Manual, please create an Issue against the User Manual. At OpenHW, we take documentation very seriously and bugs in the documentation are treated the same as bugs in the RTL.

@DanieleParravicini-Synthara

Hey @MikeOpenHWGroup, I am a collegue of @MariaElenaDAgostino-synthara

By looking at the ReadTheDocs you pointed us to I landed here https://docs.openhwgroup.org/projects/cve2-user-manual/en/latest/02_user/integration.html.

I could find just a reference on the boot_addr_i but I do not find any information on the interrupt vector table.

We tried to use a vector table that was compatible with this other version of Ibex and used its documentation on ReadTheDocs. But it does not work, maybe something changed with the interrupt vector table format.

We will share some waveforms to show the problem we are facing.

We could submit a PR to fix the simple-system firmware if we have all the information.

Kind regards,
Daniele

@MikeOpenHWGroup
Copy link
Member

Hi @DanieleParravicini-Synthara, please do not introduce a second topic to a closed Issue. We are very strict about having one-and-only-one topic per GitHub Issue. I think this is an important topic, so if you could open a new issue that would be great. Thanks for your understanding.

@DanieleParravicini-Synthara

refer to #268

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested wontfix This will not be worked on
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants