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

Reconsider timing implications of added LUTs in PinsN #165

Closed
whitequark opened this issue Aug 2, 2019 · 1 comment
Closed

Reconsider timing implications of added LUTs in PinsN #165

whitequark opened this issue Aug 2, 2019 · 1 comment

Comments

@whitequark
Copy link
Contributor

@sbourdeauducq has expressed displeasure several times about the LUT in PinsN, and maybe we should remove it at least for registered IO.

@whitequark
Copy link
Contributor Author

Actually, now that I think about it, there is no reason whatsoever to instantiate these LUTs except in one case: differential non-registered IO on an architecture without native differential outputs (iCE40). We should just remove support for it entirely, it's not worth the hassle.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant