Global Sources
EE Times-Asia
Stay in touch with EE Times Asia
?
EE Times-Asia > FPGAs/PLDs
?
?
FPGAs/PLDs??

FPGA tools need hardware assistance

Posted: 01 May 2001 ?? ?Print Version ?Bookmark and Share

Keywords:fpga? hdl? embedded system? supercomputer?

While techniques such as logic emulation provide a new tool specifically for logic designers, many other FPGA-based systems serve as high-performance replacements for standard computers for everything from embedded systems to supercomputers.

However, if these systems hope to become usable by software programmers, they must be able to translate applications described in standard software programming languages into FPGA realizations.

Although there are ways to transform specifications written in hardware-description languages into electronic circuits, translating a standard software program into hardware presents extra challenges. Most standard software languages normally have a sequential execution model, with instructions executing one after another.

This means that a hardware implementation of a software program is either restricted to sequential operation, yielding an extremely inefficient circuit, or the mapping software must figure out how to make parallel an inherently sequential specification.

Because we are using a language designed for specifying software programs to create hardware implementations, the translation software faces a mapping process more complex than for standard HDLs.

Code translators

Many research projects have developed methods for translating code in C, C++, Ada, Occam, data parallel C, Smalltalk, assembly and Java, as well as special HDLs into FPGA realizations. These systems typically take software programs written in a subset of the programming language, translate the data computations into hardware operations and insert multiplexing, latches and control state machines to recreate the control flow.

It is relatively simple to translate straight-line code from software languages into hardware. Expressions in the code have direct implementations in hardware that can compute the correct result (they must, since a processor on which the language is intended to run must have hardware to execute it).

For complex control flow, such as loops that execute a variable number of times or "if" statements containing function calls, control-state machines must be implemented. The code is broken into blocks of straight-line code. Each of these code segments is represented by a separate state in the control state machine. The straight-line code is converted into logic functions with the series of operations collapsed into a combinational circuit. Variables whose scope spans code segments are held in registers. The input to the register is a mux that combines the logic for assignment statements from different code sequences.

States can be combined sequentially or in parallel, allowing greater concurrency in the hardware as well as minimizing the hardware cost of the controller.

Critical assumption

Most of the systems for translating software programs into hardware algorithms assume that only the most time-critical portions of the code are mapped. Those systems use the FPGA, or FPGAs, as a coprocessor to a standard CPU. The processor implements most of the program, handling much of the operations that are necessary to implement complex algorithms, but which contribute little to the total computation time. The truly time-critical portions of the algorithm are translated into hardware, using the FPGA to implement the small fraction of the total code complexity that accounts for most of the overall run-time. Processors can easily implement a large variety of operations by working through a complex series of instructions stored in high-density memory chips.

Mapping all those instructions into FPGA logic means that the complete functionality of the entire program must be available simultaneously, using a huge amount of circuit space. During the execution of the program, the processor executes the software code until it hits a portion of the code implemented inside the FPGA coprocessor. Once the FPGA has computed the function, the results are transferred back to the processor, which continues with the rest of the software code.

Limited portions

This does limit the portions of the code that can be translated into hardware. However, a system that converts the complete program into hardware must either convert those operations into FPGA realizations, yielding much larger area requirements, or ban those constructs from the source code, limiting the types of operations and algorithms that can be supported. Systems such as the Nimble compiler developed at Synopsys provide a middle ground, making effective use of both FPGA and CPU components for different portions of a given computation.

However, other systems have much less tightly coupled FPGAs and require protocols between the two systems. In most of these systems the communication mechanism puts a hard limit on the amount of information that can be communicated and thus the amount of the computation that can be migrated to hardware. Another important concern with compiling only a portion of a program into hardware is determining which portions of the code to so map. Obviously, the code that gets mapped to the hardware needs to contain a large portion of the run-time of the overall algorithm.

Some code sequences will achieve higher performance improvements than others when mapped to hardware. Also, some code sequences may be too complex to map into hardware, not fitting within the logic resources present in the FPGA. In general, greater automation of this decision process is necessary.

? Scott Hauck

Associate Electrical Engineering Professor

University of Washington





Article Comments - FPGA tools need hardware assistance
Comments:??
*? You can enter [0] more charecters.
*Verify code:
?
?
Webinars

Seminars

Visit Asia Webinars to learn about the latest in technology and get practical design tips.

?
?
Back to Top