clash-compiler
clash-compiler copied to clipboard
Vivado test trips up on AndSpecificEnable
It gives the following result:
Error: outputVerifier, expected: 000000010000000100000001, actual: 000000010000000000000000
Time: 40 ns Iteration: 1 Process: /testBench/r_assert/line__245 File: /tmp/clash-test-a14a5f544b110810/AndSpecificEnable.testBench/testBench.vhdl
Error: outputVerifier, expected: 000000110000001000000010, actual: 000000110000000100000001
Time: 60 ns Iteration: 1 Process: /testBench/r_assert/line__245 File: /tmp/clash-test-a14a5f544b110810/AndSpecificEnable.testBench/testBench.vhdl
Error: outputVerifier, expected: 000001110000010000000100, actual: 000001110000001000000010
Time: 100 ns Iteration: 1 Process: /testBench/r_assert/line__245 File: /tmp/clash-test-a14a5f544b110810/AndSpecificEnable.testBench/testBench.vhdl
Error: outputVerifier, expected: 000010010000010100000100, actual: 000010010000010000000100
Time: 120 ns Iteration: 1 Process: /testBench/r_assert/line__245 File: /tmp/clash-test-a14a5f544b110810/AndSpecificEnable.testBench/testBench.vhdl
Error: outputVerifier, expected: 000010110000011000000110, actual: 000010110000010100000100
Time: 140 ns Iteration: 1 Process: /testBench/r_assert/line__245 File: /tmp/clash-test-a14a5f544b110810/AndSpecificEnable.testBench/testBench.vhdl
Error: outputVerifier, expected: 000011110000100000001000, actual: 000011110000011000000110
Time: 180 ns Iteration: 1 Process: /testBench/r_assert/line__245 File: /tmp/clash-test-a14a5f544b110810/AndSpecificEnable.testBench/testBench.vhdl
Error: outputVerifier, expected: 00010001UUUUUUUU0UUUUUUU, actual: 000100010000100000001000
Time: 200 ns Iteration: 1 Process: /testBench/r_assert/line__245 File: /tmp/clash-test-a14a5f544b110810/AndSpecificEnable.testBench/testBench.vhdl
Perhaps this is a bug in our test infrastructure.
Ah it might be the clock crossing picking a different order; there's probably two concurrent processes where it is undefined which runs first. So far all simulators picked the same order we did, but here we might have a simulator doing it differently.
I would have to look further to see if this is it, though.