We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
Leaving a Signal unassigned does not make it assume its reset value when used as the RHS of an assignment.
Signal
reset
Consider the following snippet:
from nmigen import * from nmigen.back import rtlil class Foo: def elaborate(self, platform): m = Module() foo = Signal(reset=1) bar = Signal() m.d.comb += bar.eq(foo) return m foo = Foo() frag = foo.elaborate(platform=None) print(rtlil.convert(frag))
which produces the following IR:
attribute \generator "nMigen" attribute \top 1 module \top attribute \src "foo.py:9" wire width 1 input 0 \foo attribute \src "foo.py:10" wire width 1 \bar attribute \src "foo.py:10" wire width 1 $next\bar process $group_0 assign $next\bar 1'0 assign $next\bar \foo sync init sync always update \bar $next\bar end end
Should \foo be set to its reset value instead of being propagated as an input ?
\foo
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Duplicate of #30.
Sorry, something went wrong.
a5c71cd
back.rtlil: assign undriven signals to their reset value.
921f506
Fixes #35.
No branches or pull requests
Leaving a
Signal
unassigned does not make it assume itsreset
value when used as the RHS of an assignment.Consider the following snippet:
which produces the following IR:
Should
\foo
be set to its reset value instead of being propagated as an input ?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: