No they're not. Claims 1, 8, and 15 are the only independent claims in the patent (if you're not infringing the independent claims you're not infringing any of the dependent claims: the tradeoff is the more general independent claims are generally easier to invalidate). All of them depend on having a dispatch unit which can be programmed to dispatch instructions into some logic which is configured by a bitfile (and also having the code and bitfile alongside each other and loaded by the same system). Most FPGA SoCs don't have a programmable instruction dispatch unit (which seems to me to be the core of the patent), and they generally do not have the software and bitfield side-by-side and loaded by the same loader, though that is probably an element which is quite vague and could be argued either way.

I don't like patents in general (and especially in software), but this patent is not as general as you claim.