本文介绍了一种基于H.264标准的快速运动估计算法。
2021-06-03 06:27
than what a used car salesman tells you.Even the best coded algorithm means nothing if you have
2019-08-07 11:32
嗨，将input_jitter值与周期约束一起使用而不是仅仅收紧周期有什么不同？防爆。输入抖动：+/- 100 ps周期：10 ns约束1和2是等价的吗？1）TIMESPEC TS_clk = PERIOD“clk”10 ns HIGH 50％INPUT_JITTER 100 ps;2）TIMESPEC TS_clk = PERIOD“clk”9.9 ns HIGH 50％;谢谢/埃里克以上来自于谷歌翻译以下为原文Hi, what's the difference in using the input_jitter value together with the period constraint rather then just tightening the period? Ex.input jitter: +/- 100 psperiod: 10 ns Are constraints 1 and 2 equivalent?1) TIMESPEC TS_clk = PERIOD "clk" 10 ns HIGH 50% INPUT_JITTER 100 ps;2) TIMESPEC TS_clk = PERIOD "clk" 9.9 ns HIGH 50%; Thanks/Erik
2019-03-18 06:28
针对硬件实现的H.264视频编码算法改进，不看肯定后悔
2021-06-04 06:25
大家好，我正在使用Xilinx ISE 14.7（针对Virtex5，因此没有Vivado），并且遇到了工具的问题，因此更改设计中的信号名称会影响实现，从而影响时序，在某些情况下会略有变化比如说，一个计数器可以在一个设计舒适的时间和一个非常糟糕的失败之间产生差异。有没有人经历过这个？我以前曾经多次遇到这个问题，但总是设法说服自己有另一个潜在的原因，因为我不想相信这些工具会如此挑剔。我现在有一些非常具体的例子，并且发现信号名称本身并不重要，而是名称中的字符数量！例如，两个设计不同的是一个叫做“j”和“jjj”的信号可能有很大不同的时序结果，而“jjj”和“ctr”不同的设计将是相同的。此外，从比较报告看，差异源于映射工具，因为综合似乎推断出不同设计的相同输出。我仍然希望能给出一个更合乎逻辑的答案，否则如果您需要随机更改信号名称以满足时序，这会给时序收敛带来新的挑战！我很想听到任何意见或解决方案......干杯，格伦。以上来自于谷歌翻译以下为原文Hi all, I am using Xilinx ISE 14.7 (targetting Virtex5, hence no Vivado), and have come across a problem with the tools whereby changing names of signals within the design has an impact on the implementation, and hence timing, and in some cases a slight change in the name of, say, a counter can make a difference between a design comfortably timing and failing quite badly. Has anybody else experienced this? I had come across this several times before, but always managed to convince myself that there was another underlying reason, as I did not want to believe that the tools could be so picky. I now have some very concrete examples of this now, and have discovered that it is not the signal name itself that matters but the number of characters in the name! For example, two designs differring by one signal called 'j' and 'jjj' can have vastly different timing results, whereas designs differing by 'jjj' and 'ctr' will be identical. Also, from comparing reports it appears that difference originates from the mapping tool, as synthesis appears to infer an identical output for the different designs. I am still hoping that that a more logical answer can be given, as otherwise this adds a new challenge to timing closure if you need to also randomly change signal names in order to meet timing! I would love to hear any comments or solutions ... Cheers, Glenn.
2018-11-02 11:14
PCB专业术语英译，总结的太棒了
2021-04-21 06:08
