Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • State Verified Answer
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Subscribers 271 subscribers
  • Views 300 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

PicoZedSDR: Xilinx or Mathworks Workflow?

Former Member

What are the advantages and limitations of using the Mathworks Design Flow (Comm. Sys. Toolbox, Matlab, Simulink, HDL Coder) vs an all Xilinx one (Vivado, and perhaps SDK)? Does anyone have any un-biased real-life experience with either (i.e. not a sales-person)?

  • 0

    Hello Richard,

     

    MathWorks Zynq flow benefits:  modeling, simulation, and target code generation.  How would you model the AD9361 in Vivado?  How would you develop and simulate waveforms in Vivado?

     

    The MathWorks flow gives you the ability to be testing waveforms on hardware in an afternoon by targeting PicoZed SDR.  The entire Zynq framework is set up for you using pre-built Linux on the PS7 and code generation for applications running in Linux or as AXI-based perihperals in the Zynq PL.   The benefit is that you don't need to know much about Vivado, Linux, or Zynq architecture to start testing out ideas on hardware.

     

    But ultimately all roads lead to Vivado.  When you start integrating all pieces of a final PicoZed SDR design (or any Zynq design), you'll be doing your work in Vivado and SDK.

     

    I'll be interested to see the response you get from your similar post on the MathWorks site.

     

    Thanks,
    Matt

  • 0 in reply to mbrown

    Hi Matt,

    I think I'm piecing it all together slowly, and am looking for practical advice from anyone who has actual experience. When looking at a couple examples that go from Simulink to HDL code, it appears to require just as low-level of "programming" (for lack of a better word) as doing it in VHDL, but with a different visual style. Being already a bit familiar with VHDL, and not as much with Mathworks software, I'm trying to make sure that I can balance the amount of proprietary software I get involved with to get the same job done in a different, hopefully easier way. It also seems that knowledge of the underlying hardware is necessary in either case, if you expect to get realistic timing results out of the design.

    I also am very aware of my own limitations, and know there is a lot out there that I don't know about either method. To answer your questions honestly, I have no idea how I would model the AD9361 or any FMCOMMS board in Vivado (Does AD offer a BSP that I could start with?), and I would probably model waveforms in modular, hierarchical VHDL designs and associated testbenches. I'm not sure what you mean by "testing waveforms in an afternoon", but if you have experience in doing just that, I'm here to learn, and would like to know more about your methods.

    Thanks,

    - Rich

  • 0

    It's really good to see how practical you are being as you look at this.  The big "easy" button doesn't exist.

     

    Yes, no doubt, when using Simulink for code generation (especially HDL) you have to adjust your design style. However, it does keep you at a somewhat higher level of programming than VHDL or Verilog.  And you get the benefit of excellent Simulation capabilities, which is a must-have for any algorithm development.  But it is really helpful to understand VHDL/Verilog when building up a design in Simulink that is headed towards code gen. 

     

    RE: timing results

    No question - hand coding still gives the fastest Fmax.  But what do you need to achieve during your prototype phase? 

     

    RE: testing waveforms in an afternoon

    Create your waveforms in Simulink.  Simulate in Simulink.  Use the Zynq Support Package to create code and automatically execute on the target hardware (PicoZed SDR).  From start to finish, you can literally be seeing waveforms at the RF connectors in a few hours.  This is what we demonstrate during the hands-on SDR Speedway seminar.

     

    RE: ADI BSP for PicoZed SDR

    If you're looking for a Simulink model of the AD9361, look here

    In terms of BSP, what are you looking for?  Something more than the reference design that your working with from the ADI wiki?

     

    MathWorks offer a free trial of their software.  Might be worth kicking the tires.

     

    /Matt

  • 0 in reply to mbrown

    Matt,

    Thanks for your input.

    Having some brief Simulink experience, I can see the advantage it provides for simulation before generation of the code, which is nice (also with being able to track it back to matlab code).

    As you point out, timing results really aren't critical in the prototyping phase.

    I'll definitely have to take a look at the SDR Speedway class, as well as the Mathworks PicoZedSDR Trial (which seems like it would still work with the MicroZed and FMCOMMS combo).

    As far as the BSP I was referring to, you've pointed me in the right direction. A quick stroll through the ADI Wiki brought me to https://wiki.analog.com/resources/eval/user-guides/ad-fmcomms2-ebz/reference_hdl , which is what I was looking for.

    Thanks again,

    Rich