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

symbiflow_route needs to fail when timing is not met #2331

Closed
tcal-x opened this issue Nov 24, 2021 · 6 comments
Closed

symbiflow_route needs to fail when timing is not met #2331

tcal-x opened this issue Nov 24, 2021 · 6 comments

Comments

@tcal-x
Copy link
Contributor

tcal-x commented Nov 24, 2021

The symbiflow_route wrapper needs to determine if VPR met the desired timing, and exit with an error status if it does not. Perhaps we can add an option for skipping the timing check, but the default should be that timing is checked, and the flow fails if timing is not met.

See enjoy-digital/litex#1110.

@mithro
Copy link
Contributor

mithro commented Nov 24, 2021

@kgugala / @acomodi -- PTAL.

@acomodi
Copy link
Contributor

acomodi commented Nov 25, 2021

I believe that, rather than having this check in the wrapper, this should be within VPR, and the option passed to it to hard fail in case of timing violations produced during the analysis step.

@mithro
Copy link
Contributor

mithro commented Nov 25, 2021

As I have said multiple times, timing failure must cause the tooling to exit with an error by default. There can be an option to allow it to continue with a timing fail.

@acomodi
Copy link
Contributor

acomodi commented Nov 26, 2021

My suggestion was to keep this check within VPR, rather than in the wrapper. Not sure if VTR devs will want to fail by default in case of timing violations during the analysis step, but in case we might just add the option in the wrapper. Either way this should end up in VPR

@umarcor
Copy link
Contributor

umarcor commented May 18, 2022

I'm closing this because the wrappers were removed from this repo, and the issue is tracked in verilog-to-routing/vtr-verilog-to-routing#1928.

@umarcor umarcor closed this as completed May 18, 2022
@tcal-x
Copy link
Contributor Author

tcal-x commented Aug 15, 2022

Followup: verilog-to-routing/vtr-verilog-to-routing#2060 has been merged, so we can now pick up work on correct handling in the F4PGA flow.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants