nelsobe

@WhiteNinjaZ So, if i understand, you have added this test to the symbiflow-arch-defs flow to make it look like the other tests and so @mkurc-ant and others can better see...

We have been experimenting to try to understand why some MMCM designs work with Symbiflow and some don't (when all the designs we have tried do work with Vivado). We...

@mkurc-ant : In looking through the database/artix7 bitstream files I see a number of things: 1. For MMCME2_ADV I see that COMP.ZHOLD and COMP.Z_ZHOLD seem to be the only bits...

@mkurc-ant I am not aware of any bits that are missing. I was just reacting to comments in [https://github.com/SymbiFlow/symbiflow-arch-defs/pull/1729#issue-730282907] which referred to unknown bits. But I can see that those...

@mkurc-ant What are the ramifications you see from modifying the techmapper to have INTERNAL the default COMPENSATION value as you seem to have been recommending it in the comment above?

Yes, lots of such messages. I just dumped everything it output to a file, it is attached. [128kb8.txt](https://github.com/SymbiFlow/prjxray/files/4405115/128kb8.txt)

This issue (#1285) suggests that there are some holes in the prjxray bitstream db as it relates to BRAMs. Interestingly, it only occurs for _some_ BRAMs in one column of...

Yes, we have verified that the INIT in Vivado is different from the INIT in the resulting FASM (and that it gives a bunch of "unknown" messagses when it creates...

Yes, the 47 was a typo, they are both in X37. Files attached, including .tcl file which generates .bit file (also included). I am running Vivado 2017.2 on Ubuntu 16.04....

Thanks. So, are you saying the BRAM_R are not supported yet? Or, that there is a bug in their handling? A curious thing, however, is that from our experiments it...