Classification: UK OFFICIAL Hi, A while ago I added support for an FMC slot to a BSP for a board I'm using. I've been trying to use the slot, and I've been noticing some issues. It occurred to me that when I added support for the slot I defined it as an LPC even though it is an HPC. I did this because although the slot is an HPC, the board (ZCU102) only implements a fraction of the additional pins that HPC provides over LPC (only the high rate pins, labels starting "DP..."), and I didn't fancy adding 200 lines to my xml saying the rest of the pins are N/C :D I did this because afaik, the LPCs pins are a perfect subset of the HPCs pins (in the HPC, all of the LPC pins are implemented and do exactly the same thing). Is this okay to do? Or is it not as simple as that (e.g. dependant on the board implementation of the slot)? Thanks for any help you can give me, Dominic Walters "This e-mail and any attachment(s) is intended for the recipient only. Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. Communications with Dstl are monitored and/or recorded for system efficiency and other lawful purposes, including business intelligence, business metrics and training. Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect Dstl policy." "If you are not the intended recipient, please remove it from your system and notify the author of the email and centralenq@dstl.gov.uk"

Hi Dominic, Since the physical connectors are not different between LPC and HPC, it sounds like the slot is really an LPC slot, since it does not support the HPC signals. On 12/16/19 11:24 AM, Walters Dominic A via discuss wrote: > Classification: UK OFFICIAL > > > Hi, > > A while ago I added support for an FMC slot to a BSP for a board I'm using. > I've been trying to use the slot, and I've been noticing some issues. > > It occurred to me that when I added support for the slot I defined it as an LPC even though it is an HPC. > I did this because although the slot is an HPC, the board (ZCU102) only implements a fraction of the additional pins that HPC provides over LPC (only the high rate pins, labels starting "DP..."), and I didn't fancy adding 200 lines to my xml saying the rest of the pins are N/C :D > I did this because afaik, the LPCs pins are a perfect subset of the HPCs pins (in the HPC, all of the LPC pins are implemented and do exactly the same thing). > Is this okay to do? Or is it not as simple as that (e.g. dependant on the board implementation of the slot)? > > Thanks for any help you can give me, > Dominic Walters > > > "This e-mail and any attachment(s) is intended for the recipient only. Its unauthorised use, > disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. Communications with Dstl are monitored and/or > recorded for system efficiency and other lawful purposes, including business intelligence, business > metrics and training. Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect Dstl policy." > > "If you are not the intended recipient, please remove it from your system and notify the author of > the email and centralenq@dstl.gov.uk" >