This is a Mini-RISC CPU/Microcontroller that is mostly compatible with thePIC 16C57 from Microchip.Legal=====PIC, Microship, etc. are Trademarks of Microchip Technology Inc.I have no idea if implementing this core will or will not violatepatents, copyrights or cause any other type of lawsuits.I provide this core AS IS, without any warrenties. If you decide tobuild this core, you are responsible for any legal resolutions, suchas patents and copyrights, and perhaps others ....	This source file(s) may be used and distributed without	restriction provided that this copyright statement is not	removed from the file and that any derivative work contains	the original copyright notice and the associated disclaimer.	THIS SOURCE FILE(S) IS/ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND WITHOUT ANY	EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT	LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY AND	FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.Motivation==========After seeing the "free_risc8" on the free-ip web site, I got excitedand downloaded the core. Pretty soon I found out that it had manymany errors and omissions from the original 16C57. So I started lookingat the code. This is when I realized it was very badly designed andcould not be made run faster. So, I sat down and wrote my own PIC IPcore last night. A lot of work was spend in writing test code to ensurethat it was 100% compatible from the software point of view.- A PIC compatible Microcontroller that runs a lot faster- Separate (External to the core) Program Memory- Options to extend the coreCompatibility=============This design should be fully software compatible to the Microchip Implementationof the PIC 16C57, except for the following extensions:- Port A is full 8 bits wide- Hardware stack is 4 level deep [original 2 levels] (can be easily expanded)- Executions of instructions that modify the PC has become a lot more expensive  due to the pipeline and execution of instructions on every cycle.  Any instruction that writes to the PC (PC as destination (f), call, goto, retlw)  now takes 4 cycles to execute (instead of 2 in the origianl implementation).  The 4 'skip' instructions, remain as in the original implmentation: 1 cycle  if not skipped, 2 cycles if skipped.- Sampling of IO ports might be off- Timer and watchdog might be off a few cyclesPerformance===========- Single cycle instruction execution, except as noted above.- Here are results of some sample implementations:  - Xilinx Spartan 2e ((Device: xc2s50e-6): Fmax: 80Mhz, Utilization: 30%  - Xilinx Spartan2 (Device: xc2s30-6-cs144): Fmax: 50Mhz, Utilization: 66%, Ports: Tsu: 2.2nS, Tcq: 7.7nS  - Xilinx Virtex   (Device: xcv50-4-cs144) : Fmax: 40Mhz, Utilization: 35%, Ports: Tsu: 3.0nS, Tcq: 6.2nS  - Xilinx VirtexE  (Device: xcv50e-8-cs144): Fmax: 66Mhz, Utilization: 35%, Ports: Tsu: 1.7nS, Tcq: 4.5nS  Half of the cycle time is spend in routing delays. My guess is that by placing  proper locatiuon contrains and guiding the back-end tools, a significant  speed improvement can be achieved ....- I estimat about 25K gates with the xilinx primitives, (excluding Register  File and Programm Memory).Implementing the core=====================The only file you should edit if you really want to implement this core, is the'primitives.v' file. It contains all parts that can be optimized, depending onthe technology used. It includes memories, and arithmetic modules.I added a primitives_xilinx,v file and xilinx_primitives.zip which containprimitives for xilinx.'risc_core.v' is the top level without program memory and tristate Io buffers for ports.This is probably a good starting point if you want to instantiate the core in to a largerdesign. If you just want a PIC clone, take a loot at 'risc_core_top.v', it was writtenwith Xilinx FPGAs in mind, but should be easily addaptred to other vendors FPGAs - justreplace the memory blocks ...To-Do=====Things that need to be done1) Write more test/compliance test vectors   - Verify that all instructions after a goto/call/retlw/write to PCL are not executed   - Verify ALU   - Timer and Watchdog tests   - Perhaps some other ereas ?2) Extensions ?   - I guess this is on a "as needed" basis   - A friend suggested to add registers that can be shared by two or more cores in a MP type configurationAuthor======I have been doing ASIC design, verification and synthesis for over 15 years.This core is only a "mid-night hack", and should used with caution.I'd also like to know if anyone will actually use this core. Please send me anote if you will !Rudolf Usselmannrusselmann@hotmail.comFeel free to send me comments, suggestions and bug reports.