Using Zynq without EDK/XPS

Hi lpelletier,

The recommended toolflow for Zynq is to use PlanAhead since that will be the most familiar environment for when Zynq becomes supported by the Vivado tools next year.  Of course, PlanAhead serves as a front end to the XPS tool but the majority of our tutorials and documentation are based around using PlanAhead/XPS so that will be the path of least resistance when diving into Zynq.  You may be able to use PlanAhead/ISE only flow to build a Zynq system, but you will likely struggle to get the PS to communicate with the PL which is what the XPS tool was designed to do.

As for the Linux-side driver code, Zynq is not different than any other embedded Linux system.  If you know what you are doing, the sky is the limit once you get the cross toolchain installed.  If editing source code with vi, building from the command prompt, and debugging with GDB is your expertise, you will likely run into very few problems along the way.  There are a majority of users that would be intimidated by going this route, maybe because they don't know where to start or they are unfamiliar with the development environment.  From a Linux development perspective, the SDK tools really are only needed to build the First Stage Boot Loader to get your Zynq system configured and U-Boot loaded.  However, the SDK tools do give an integrated development environment to help ease the transition from other Eclipse based development environments.  SDK also has a lot of great features that can save you time during development if you do not already have a solid development method. 

It is worth following some of the tutorials and checking the tools out.  Even if you don't end up using all of the tools during your own Zynq development, you will get a better feel for the Zynq platform and a better understanding of how all the pieces fit together.

Regards,

-Kevin

Hi,
I'm in a similar situation to Ipelletier. I've done software for a vertex 4 with powerPC integrated, and Zynq/Zedboard resembles that and its amazingly cheap. But it is also quite a bit more complex.

What version of Eclipse is SDK based on?  Back in the vertex 4 days it was a quite an old one. Is there a way to integrate the Xilinks part of SDK with an existing newer Eclipse installation?

It also looks like the Xilinx tool installers aren't fully functional. They certanly aren't as easy to install/license as Altera. I just discovered several zero length files in my Xilinx directory that was preventing me from doing any of the tutorials. When I went to check, it turns out that my tar file had a bad MD5 checksum. The downloader didn't corect that and the installer didn't notice it and abort.  Xilinx certanly needs to work on getting the install from internet mechanism working.

Mike

Like you, I want to avoid the xilinx GUI. I want all of my development to go through emacs. It looks like no matter how I do it, there will be a pretty steep ramp learning the command line tools and integrating them. The answer at http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/dt_edk.htm points to an extensive EDK reference guide which includes instructions on invoking EDK tools from the command line. The ISE command line tools  guide is at: http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/sw_manuals/xilinx14_3/devref.pdf

Ideally, I want to wrap all of the invocations in some make files and call them from emacs or the shell.

Hi Galfonz and jjorgens,

I do not know of any easy way to do what you suggested.  It looks like SDK 14.3 is based upon Eclispe 3.6.2 but if you are doing Linux application development, I don't see why you could not do editing in your favorite text editor and use a Makefile to call the cross toolchain for build.

For many of the XPS and SDK tasks, the command line tools are being called in the background.  I used to use the tools just to go through a basic design flow until I reached a platform that I knew I could work with.  At that point, I would go through and pick out calls being made from within the console or output window of the tools and merge them into a script which I could call from the command line or run on the nightly build and test server.

Regards,

-Kevin

Personally, I use ISE Project Navigator with XPS, without PlanAhead.

Project Navigator for Zynq (No PlanAhead)

1. Adding an Embedded Module to ISE

http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/sw_manuals/xilinx14_1/platform_studio/ps_c_cxd_adding_embedded_module_to_ise.htm

or

Selecting an ISE Project in Project Navigator and Launching XPS

http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/sw_manuals/xilinx14_1/platform_studio/ps_p_cxd_selecting_ise_project_in_project_navigator_and_launching_xps.htm

2. After launching XPS, generate the Zynq/ arm module as in

http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/sw_manuals/xilinx14_1/ug873_zynq_ctt.pdf

3. For source directories at the same level as the project, and a more sensible top level, combine verilog_project_top.v with arm_top.v from Generate Top HDL Source
verilog_project_top.v Set as Top Module
arm_top.v Remove
http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/sw_manuals/xilinx11/edk_ctt.pdf
pp. 28



Or with the relative addressing in the verilog source files, copy the source directories to

verilog_project_toparmpcores verilog_project _interface_v1_00_ahdl

4. Export Hardware Design To SDK without Bitstream, and load the bitstream in SDK. Since with Bitstream will rerun Synthesize and Implement.

Hello everybody!

I discovered that is possible to "bypass" PlanAhead when developing a new Zynq system. I use XPS to define my system, then generate bitstream and export it to SDK. My question is: what is the correct toolflow for Zynq development? Are there any differences between using PlanAhead and not using it?

Thanks

I'm uncertain if anyone above addressed the question of integrating PL IP into the PS peripheral bus. Is this do-able without EDK/XPS? The reason to ask, of course, is the cost: the EDK costs $500. The base tools for the Zedboard does not include a license for the EDK. All you get is the Webpack and device-locked ChipScope.

If the EDK *is* required for anything resembling useful integration, the same $900 ($400 Zedboard + $500 EDK) can buy the Xilinx ZC702 board instead, albeit with a device-locked EDK license.

I'm addressing here only the integration between custom FPGA logic (PL) and the processor subsystem (PS). The software and driver development issues are a separate, though related, topic.

I would like to hear what's involved in integrating custom FPGA IP's into the processor's peripheral bus using Webpack without EDK/XPS.

Thanks.

Part of my confusion might be that older versions of Webpack, pre 13.x, did not include EDK functionality for any parts. I'm still uncertain after browsing the Xilinx site whether more recent 14.x versions have enough EDK functionality to do useful work on the Zynq 7020.

Thanks.

The EDK is fully functional in WebPack. Many people on this site are using it.

In regard to some upstream comments, I gave up on the PlanAhead flow as well and switched back to ISE.

---
Joe

Thanks Joe for pointing out that EDK is fully functional for Zynq targets in WebPACK.  You should find that WebPACK offers support for the 7010, 7020, and 7030 devices without having to switch licenses.

That being said, when installing the tools, you will always want to use the System Edition option but later license with the WebPack license file as is covered in this thread.

http://www.zedboard.org/content/ise-141-webpack-install-work-arounds

Even when following this installation flow, XPS will likely still present a message about having an insufficient license but you should then be able to click out of the license manager screen and continue on successfully completing your Zynq platform design.

With respect to the comments about the different tool flows, using the tool flow that works best for you is fine for your development needs.  There are a lot of users that are developing their hardware platforms with an XPS only flow.  However, keep in mind that eventually XPS will go away when switching to the Vivado tools.  The main reason the PlanAhead flow is so strongly recommended is that is closely matches the Vivado flow.  As a result, the idea is that there will not be as large a learning curve for customers already familiar with the PlanAhead flow who wish to switch to Vivado for Zynq development.

Hopefully, this serves as a useful explanation as to why we release tutorials that start with PlanAhead.

Regards,

-Kevin