you cannot fathom how bad eg Xilinx's FPGA tool suite is. like beyond the fact it's like some kind of frankenstein monster because they bought up a bunch of smaller tools and glued them together with fucking tcl, any individual piece is worse than your worst open source compiler/ide/whatever tool you use to build software. and yet people say that it's 10x better than the competitors' offerings. hell on earth is being an FPGA dev without a direct line to Xilinx employee for help debugging (which is how things really work professionally).
just lend some credence to myself here - vitis, their supposed hls offering that turns C++ into RL by magic and genius and oracles, today embeds LLVM 7.0 (released in 19 Sep 2018). gee i wonder how many perf and etc improvements have landed in LLVM since 7 since today LLVM is approach 17.
i could tell you more but it would just spike my blood pressure after 6 months of not having to deal with that mess.
Can confirm. I used Xilinx Vivado to compile for their FPGAs in Amazon F1 servers a few years ago. There came a point when each time I edited a single small Verilog file in my small project, the GUI took 40 minutes of 100% CPU just to update the file list in the GUI. That's before you could do anything useful like tell it to compile or simulate. The GUI wasn't useful until it finished this silly update.
I knew FPGA compilation could be slow, but this wasn't compilation, this was a ridiculously basic part of the GUI. I knew it had to read my file and analyse the few module dependencies, but seriously, 40 minutes? At that time I just wanted to run simple simulations of small circuits, which shouldn't be slow.
In (open source) Verilator, the same simulations ran from the same source files in just a few millliseconds with nothing precomputed or cached.
I looked into what Xilinx Vivado was really doing and found a log indicating that it was re-running a Verilog read on the changed file several thousand times, each time taking a second or so.
That was such a ridiculous bug for software Xilinx said they had spent over $500M developing. If there were good parts of the software I didn't get to see them due to this sort of nonsense. I think it was fixed in a later version, but due to (yay) enforced licensing constraints I couldn't use a fixed version targeting these FPGAs. That's when I abandoned Vivado and Xilinx (and Amazon) for the project as I didn't have that much spare time to waste on every edit.
I am under the impression the current crop of open source FPGA and especially open source ASIC tools are much better designed.
> I looked into what Xilinx Vivado was really doing and found a log indicating that it was re-running a Verilog read on the changed file several thousand times, each time taking a second or so.
Just reading that made me nauseous, to think this forced so many trillions of CPU cycles to be spent on nothing, and nobody at Xilinx corrected it until some time later.
I started working with a Stratix 10 GX dev kit last year, and the Intel Quartus Prime Pro software. It's been a nightmare.
1. Unless you have a direct line to an experienced support engineer inside Intel, technical support amounts to pleading with new-hire support engineers who can't do more than try to look something up and regurgitate it back to you.
2. Sample designs don't work with the tools you have. A design might be for version 18 of Quartus and you have version 23. You can try to auto-upgrade the IP, and maybe 3/4 of the time it works. The other 1/4 of the time it's some obscure error you can't track down, so you're back on the "Community Site" begging for help.
3. Doing something like programming your design into flash on the S10 board involves lots and lots of research, including watching Intel produced YouTube videos.
I could go on, but the whole process is like running in wet cement.
> I could go on, but the whole process is like running in wet cement.
just quit. seriously it's not worth it. no job you have (not even low-latency work in HFT) will compensate you enough to make investing time, blood, sweat, hair, and sleep into this work worth it. there is a better, more rewarding, with an actually transferable set of skills, software job waiting for you somewhere out there.
> i could tell you more but it would just spike my blood pressure after 6 months of not having to deal with that mess.
There was a time when I could've transitioned to FPGA development and I was pretty keen to do so. But after using (fighting with) Xilinx's tools and watching other people who were deeper into the FPGA side wage similar wars I decided it just wasn't worth it. That it would be better just to stay on the software side of things where the tools are mostly open source and so much better. In FPGA development you just don't have any control over the backend tools - fortunately there are a lot of front-end simulation tools like Verilator that are open source and some limited backend tools like Yosys are open source. Hopefully open source will continue to make inroads, but it's slow going.
just lend some credence to myself here - vitis, their supposed hls offering that turns C++ into RL by magic and genius and oracles, today embeds LLVM 7.0 (released in 19 Sep 2018). gee i wonder how many perf and etc improvements have landed in LLVM since 7 since today LLVM is approach 17.
i could tell you more but it would just spike my blood pressure after 6 months of not having to deal with that mess.