Re: Tr:Rep:Re: [f-cpu] "Tree"

[Juergen Goeritz <goeritz@oekomm.de>]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, nicO wrote:
> Codesign aren't only simulated SW with HW, it's a way of design. The
> idea is to clearly describe your specification. Formal language are the
> best for that because it will proove some properties. Todays tool's
> maker try to implement "runnable specification". SystemC is born with
> that idea in mind.
> 
> I don't thing it the best idea because to run something, you _must_
> allmost finish a kind of simulation of your system. But at least, you
> don't need to write synthetisable stuff.
> 
> So you try to push the SW/HW split as far as you can to find the best
> cut. So you avoid redesign or late problem. It's well know that later a
> problem is found, more costly it is. I have even read that cost are 10x
> at each level.
> 
> So, by using SystemC, you are supposed to win a lot of time, the feed
> back are quicker and much more efficient.

Ohh! But even with SystemC you can't really co-design. You
can't just write your software and move the sw/hw split later
BECAUSE you already have to write those parts hardware level
C that you want to be able to put into hardware later. This
means you aren't really using a new method but a new language
- the division is done also in relatively early stages of the
design.

What I would want is to write just a normal program and
have a tool that extracts me the parts of my complete
functionality that can be put into hardware. I don't like
restrictions on the programming style side. And I want a
tool that tells me about the achievable performance at
every step of the development process. Only then you can
make intelligent decisions.

JG

*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu       in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/