Replies: 1 comment
-
|
This is an interesting observation. The timing model in RapidWright is an approximate timing model and is not designed as a comprehensive timing solution, for example it does not calculate hold time. The timing results will vary from Vivado by a small amount. Are you able to share an example of a specific path that exhibits this behavior? Or, are you willing to suggest any improvements to the timing model? It is quite possible that we simply aren't covering a specific scenario as well as we could, so we are open to improvements. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi, I’ve encountered an issue with underestimated delay calculation.
I’m using the UltraScale+ KU5P device and running reportTimingExample.java on a routed DCP. When the timing path passes through HDIO or GTY columns, the reported delay appears to be smaller than expected.
After checking the TimingModel, I noticed that the distArray matrix might not contain values for the columns where these tile types (HDIO or GTY) are located. As a result, the d value in the delay formula seems to be underestimated, which causes the final delay to be too small.
Is this expected behavior?
Looking forward to your response — thank you!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions