Hi @RFStuff, Config does not use compiler so it don't understand '`include directive or any other directive targeted for compiler or dig simulator its only capable of working with libraries and cellviews visible in LibraryManager. I have been dealing with the hierarchical verilog source files a lot lately and can comment that for this specific case you have a few options: Create verilog cellviews in your library for all the modules that are present within hierarchy and copy the content of included files in corresponding cellview (sync_a,sync_b) and don't forget to setup switch and and stop list correctly ( verilog shall not be in the stop list so that the config can proceed exploring the hierarchy) In theory you can try another option is to leave the internals of the sync_module verilog file to be handled by a compiler and xcelium/ncsim. In this case you can bind the instance of the sync_block to either " Specify Reference verilog " . However this does not work for the verilog files that contain some hierarchy within .You can specify the verilog or any other file via GUI ( module name must match with the one in config. You will have to configure additional argument for dig simulator and add include directory path using -incdir=pathtotetdir Another alternative is similar top previous option but you can bind the instance of the sync_block to " Mark as External HDL Text" .In this case you will have to setup additional arguments for dig simulator: - one to link the verilog file of sync module for dig simuator using -F path_to_sync_modulefile/verilog_file_nam e - and similar to option #2 setup include path to include directory using -incdir=path_to_test_dir I prefer way with "top" verilog instance bound to " Mark as External HDL Text " and making a my own library via make file and. Example of mylibfile content : -incdir=pathtomyincdir -makelib MyTestLib path_tofile/filename1 .. path_tofile/filenamex -endlib Such file is then included to dig simulator via -f /pathtofile/mylibfile or -F pathtofile/mylibife option. Option 3 is ok when you are dealing with simple hierarchies while personally prefer #4 to any other options since it has a less number of extra steps and its beneficial when working with more complex hierarchy then just 1 level.
↧