-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Expand file tree
/
Copy pathProbabilities.v
More file actions
167 lines (156 loc) · 13.9 KB
/
Probabilities.v
File metadata and controls
167 lines (156 loc) · 13.9 KB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
module Probabilities(input wire clock)
always @ (posedge clock)
begin
.Loop1(1);
end
endmodule
module Loop1(input wire[50:0] i1)
if(i1 < (1 << 50))
begin
.Loop2(i1, i1 << 1);
end
if(i1 > (1 << 49))
begin
//End of program
end
endmodule
module Loop2(input wire[50:0] i1, input wire[51:0] i2)
if(i2 < (1 << 51))
begin
.Loop3(i1, i2, 1, 0, 0, 0);
end
if(i2 > (1 << 50))
begin
.Loop1(i1 << 1);
end
endmodule
module Loop3(input wire[50:0] i1, input wire[51:0] i2, input wire[50:0] i3, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_2Hand)
if((i3 < (1 << 50)) & (i3 != i1) & (i3 != i2))//'&' rather than '&&' (short-circuit evaluation)? //Is there an intrinsic boolean expression to check for equality, instead of using '!='?
begin
.Loop4(i1, i2, i3, i3 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand);
end
if((i3 < (1 << 50)) & ((i3 == i1) | (i3 == i2)))//I've decided to repeat some conditionals in order to fully parallelize the if, check if it's slower or not
begin
.Loop3(i1, i2, i3 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand);
end
if(i3 > (1 << 49))
begin
//Pseudocode
print(2Players_W1Probability_2Hand / right denominator);
print(2Players_W2Probability_2Hand / right denominator);
print(2Players_LProbability_2Hand / right denominator);
//Pseudocode
.Loop2(i1, i2 << 1);
end
endmodule
module Loop4(input wire[50:0] i1, input wire[51:0] i2, input wire[50:0] i3, input wire[51:0] i4, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_2Hand)
if((i4 < (1 << 51)) & (i4 != i1) & (i4 != i2))//'&' rather than '&&' (short-circuit evaluation)? //Is there an intrinsic boolean expression to check for equality, instead of using '!='?
begin
.Loop5(i1, i2, i3, i4, 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand);
end
if((i4 < (1 << 51)) & ((i4 == i1) | (i4 == i2)))//I've decided to repeat some conditionals in order to fully parallelize the if, check if it's slower or not
begin
.Loop4(i1, i2, i3, i4 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand);
end
if(i4 > (1 << 50))
begin
.Loop3(i1, i2, i3 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand);
end
endmodule
module Loop5(input wire[50:0] i1, input wire[51:0] i2, input wire[50:0] i3, input wire[51:0] i4, input wire[47:0] i5, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_2Hand)
if((i5 < (1 << 47)) & (i5 != i1) & (i5 != i2) & (i5 != i3) & (i5 != i4))//'&' rather than '&&' (short-circuit evaluation)? //Is there an intrinsic boolean expression to check for equality, instead of using '!='?
begin
.Loop6(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i5 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 0, 0, 0);
end
if((i5 < (1 << 47)) & ((i5 == i1) | (i5 == i2) | (i5 == i3) | (i5 == i4)))//I've decided to repeat some conditionals in order to fully parallelize the if, check if it's slower or not
begin
.Loop5(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand);
end
if(i5 > (1 << 46))
begin
.Loop4(i1, i2, i3, i4 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand);
end
endmodule
module Loop6(input wire[50:0] i1, input wire[51:0] i2, input wire[50:0] i3, input wire[51:0] i4, input wire[47:0] i5, input wire[48:0] i6, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_5Hand)
if((i6 < (1 << 48)) & (i6 != i1) & (i6 != i2) & (i6 != i3) & (i6 != i4))//'&' rather than '&&' (short-circuit evaluation)? //Is there an intrinsic boolean expression to check for equality, instead of using '!='?
begin
.Loop7(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i6 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 0, 0, 0);
end
if((i6 < (1 << 48)) & ((i6 == i1) | (i6 == i2) | (i6 == i3) | (i6 == i4)))//I've decided to repeat some conditionals in order to fully parallelize the if, check if it's slower or not
begin
.Loop6(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand);
end
if(i6 > (1 << 47))
begin
//Pseudocode
print(2Players_W1Probability_5Hand / right denominator);
print(2Players_W2Probability_5Hand / right denominator);
print(2Players_LProbability_5Hand / right denominator);
//Pseudocode
.Loop5(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand + 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand + 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand + 2Players_LProbability_5Hand);
end
endmodule
module Loop7(input wire[50:0] i1, input wire[51:0] i2, input wire[50:0] i3, input wire[51:0] i4, input wire[47:0] i5, input wire[48:0] i6, input wire[49:0] i7, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_6Hand)
if((i7 < (1 << 49)) & (i7 != i1) & (i7 != i2) & (i7 != i3) & (i7 != i4))//'&' rather than '&&' (short-circuit evaluation)? //Is there an intrinsic boolean expression to check for equality, instead of using '!='?
begin
.Loop8(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7, i7 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, 0, 0, 0);
end
if((i7 < (1 << 49)) & ((i7 == i1) | (i7 == i2) | (i7 == i3) | (i7 == i4)))//I've decided to repeat some conditionals in order to fully parallelize the if, check if it's slower or not
begin
.Loop7(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand);
end
if(i7 > (1 << 48))
begin
//Pseudocode
print(2Players_W1Probability_6Hand / right denominator);
print(2Players_W2Probability_6Hand / right denominator);
print(2Players_LProbability_6Hand / right denominator);
//Pseudocode
.Loop6(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand + 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand + 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand + 2Players_LProbability_6Hand);
end
endmodule
module Loop8(input wire[50:0] i1, input wire[51:0] i2, input wire[50:0] i3, input wire[51:0] i4, input wire[47:0] i5, input wire[48:0] i6, input wire[49:0] i7, input wire[50:0] i8, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_7Hand)
if((i8 < (1 << 50)) & (i8 != i1) & (i8 != i2) & (i8 != i3) & (i8 != i4))//'&' rather than '&&' (short-circuit evaluation)? //Is there an intrinsic boolean expression to check for equality, instead of using '!='?
begin
.Loop9(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7, i8, i8 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, 2Players_LProbability_7Hand);
end
if((i8 < (1 << 50)) & ((i8 == i1) | (i8 == i2) | (i8 == i3) | (i8 == i4)))//I've decided to repeat some conditionals in order to fully parallelize the if, check if it's slower or not
begin
.Loop8(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7, i8 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, 2Players_LProbability_7Hand);
end
if(i8 > (1 << 49))
begin
//Pseudocode
print(2Players_W1Probability_7Hand / right denominator);
print(2Players_W2Probability_7Hand / right denominator);
print(2Players_LProbability_7Hand / right denominator);
//Pseudocode
.Loop7(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand + 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand + 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand + 2Players_LProbability_7Hand);
end
endmodule
module Loop9(input wire[50:0] i1, input wire[51:0] i2, input wire[50:0] i3, input wire[51:0] i4, input wire[47:0] i5, input wire[48:0] i6, input wire[49:0] i7, input wire[50:0] i8, input wire[51:0] i9, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, input wire[31:0] 2Players_LProbability_7Hand)
if((i9 < (1 << 51)) & (i9 != i1) & (i9 != i2) & (i9 != i3) & (i9 != i4))//'&' rather than '&&' (short-circuit evaluation)? //Is there an intrinsic boolean expression to check for equality, instead of using '!='?
begin
//Check which _7Hand beats the other (you can use the old concept of checking rank by rank at this point, or something like that) ('HandEval')
if('i1_1 | i1_2 | i1_5 | i1_6 | i1_7 | i1_8 | i1_9 beats i1_3 | i1_4 | i1_5 | i1_6 | i1_7 | i1_8 | i1_9')
begin
.Loop9(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7, i8, i9 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand + 1, 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, 2Players_LProbability_7Hand);//Come up with a formal classification for the probabilities //Should I make my own adder/incrementer? Would it be more efficient (I assume not, because this should all be done in 1 clock cycle ==> all these nested operation should perform almost instantaneously)?
end
if('i1_1 | i1_2 | i1_5 | i1_6 | i1_7 | i1_8 | i1_9 equals i1_3 | i1_4 | i1_5 | i1_6 | i1_7 | i1_8 | i1_9')
begin
.Loop9(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7, i8, i9 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand + 1, 2Players_LProbability_7Hand);
end
if('i1_3 | i1_4 | i1_5 | i1_6 | i1_7 | i1_8 | i1_9 beats i1_1 | i1_2 | i1_5 | i1_6 | i1_7 | i1_8 | i1_9')
begin
.Loop9(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7, i8, i9 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, 2Players_LProbability_7Hand + 1);
end
end
if((i9 < (1 << 51)) & ((i9 == i1) | (i9 == i2) | (i9 == i3) | (i9 == i4)))//I've decided to repeat some conditionals in order to fully parallelize the if, check if it's slower or not
begin
.Loop9(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7, i8, i9 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, 2Players_LProbability_7Hand);
end
if(i9 > (1 << 50))
begin
.Loop8(i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7, i8 << 1, 2Players_W1Probability_2Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_2Hand, 2Players_LProbability_2Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_5Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_5Hand, 2Players_LProbability_5Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_6Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_6Hand, 2Players_LProbability_6Hand, 2Players_W1Probability_7Hand, 2Players_W2Probability_7Hand, 2Players_LProbability_7Hand);
end
endmodule