Verification Academy

Search form

My Account Menu

  • Register
  • Log In
  • Topics
  • Courses
  • Forums
  • Patterns Library
  • Cookbooks
  • Events
  • More
  • All Topics
    The Verification Academy offers users multiple entry points to find the information they need. One of these entry points is through Topic collections. These topics are industry standards that all design and verification engineers should recognize. While we continue to add new topics, users are encourage to further refine collection information to meet their specific interests.
    • Languages & Standards

      • Portable Test and Stimulus
      • Functional Safety
      • Design & Verification Languages
    • Methodologies

      • UVM - Universal Verification Methodology
      • UVM Framework
      • UVM Connect
      • FPGA Verification
      • Coverage
    • Techniques & Tools

      • Verification IQ
      • Verification IP
      • Static-Based Techniques
      • Simulation-Based Techniques
      • Planning, Measurement, and Analysis
      • Formal-Based Techniques
      • Debug
      • Acceleration
  • All Courses
    The Verification Academy is organized into a collection of free online courses, focusing on various key aspects of advanced functional verification. Each course consists of multiple sessions—allowing the participant to pick and choose specific topics of interest, as well as revisit any specific topics for future reference. After completing a specific course, the participant should be armed with enough knowledge to then understand the necessary steps required for maturing their own organization’s skills and infrastructure on the specific topic of interest. The Verification Academy will provide you with a unique opportunity to develop an understanding of how to mature your organization’s processes so that you can then reap the benefits that advanced functional verification offers.
    • Universal Verification Methodology (UVM)

      • Introduction to UVM
      • UVM Basics
      • Advanced UVM
      • UVM Connect
      • UVM Debug
      • UVMF - One Bite at a Time
    • Featured Courses

      • Introduction to ISO 26262
      • Introduction to DO-254
      • Clock-Domain Crossing Verification
      • Portable Stimulus Basics
      • Power Aware CDC Verification
      • Power Aware Verification
      • SystemVerilog OOP for UVM Verification
    • Additional Courses

      • Assertion-Based Verification
      • An Introduction to Unit Testing with SVUnit
      • Evolving FPGA Verification Capabilities
      • Metrics in SoC Verification
      • SystemVerilog Testbench Acceleration
      • Testbench Co-Emulation: SystemC & TLM-2.0
      • Verification Planning and Management
      • VHDL-2008 Why It Matters
    • Formal-Based Techniques

      • Formal Assertion-Based Verification
      • Formal-Based Technology: Automatic Formal Solutions
      • Formal Coverage
      • Getting Started with Formal-Based Technology
      • Handling Inconclusive Assertions in Formal Verification
      • Sequential Logic Equivalence Checking
    • Analog/Mixed Signal

      • AMS Design Configuration Schemes
      • Improve AMS Verification Performance
      • Improve AMS Verification Quality
  • All Forum Topics
    The Verification Community is eager to answer your UVM, SystemVerilog and Coverage related questions. We encourage you to take an active role in the Forums by answering and commenting to any questions that you are able to.
    • UVM Forum

      • Active Questions
      • Solutions
      • Replies
      • No Replies
      • Search
      • UVM Forum
    • SystemVerilog Forum

      • Active Questions
      • Solutions
      • Replies
      • No Replies
      • Search
      • SystemVerilog Forum
    • Coverage Forum

      • Active Questions
      • Solutions
      • Replies
      • No Replies
      • Search
      • Coverage Forum
    • Additional Forums

      • Announcements
      • Downloads
      • OVM Forum
  • Patterns Library
    The Verification Academy Patterns Library contains a collection of solutions to many of today's verification problems. The patterns contained in the library span across the entire domain of verification (i.e., from specification to methodology to implementation—and across multiple verification engines such as formal, simulation, and emulation).
    • Implementation Patterns

      • Environment Patterns
      • Stimulus Patterns
      • Analysis Patterns
      • All Implementation Patterns
    • Specification Patterns

      • Occurrence Property Patterns
      • Order Property Patterns
      • All Specification Patterns
    • Pattern Resources

      • Start Here - Patterns Library Overview
      • Whitepaper - Taking Reuse to the Next Level
      • Verification Horizons - The Verification Academy Patterns Library
      • Contribute a Pattern to the Library
  • All Cookbooks
    Find all the methodology you need in this comprehensive and vast collection. The UVM and Coverage Cookbooks contain dozens of informative, executable articles covering all aspects of UVM and Coverage.
    • UVM Cookbook

      • UVM Basics
      • Testbench Architecture
      • DUT-Testbench Connections
      • Configuring a Test Environment
      • Analysis Components & Techniques
      • End Of Test Mechanisms
      • Sequences
      • The UVM Messaging System
      • Other Stimulus Techniques
      • Register Abstraction Layer
      • Testbench Acceleration through Co-Emulation
      • Debug of SV and UVM
      • UVM Connect - SV-SystemC interoperability
      • UVM Versions and Compatibility
      • UVM Cookbook
    • Coding Guidelines & Deployment

      • Code Examples
      • UVM Verification Component
      • Package/Organization
      • Questa/Compiling UVM
      • SystemVerilog Guidelines
      • SystemVerilog Performance Guidelines
      • UVM Guidelines
      • UVM Performance Guidelines
    • Coverage Cookbook

      • Introduction
      • What is Coverage?
      • Kinds of Coverage
      • Specification to Testplan
      • Testplan to Functional Coverage
      • Bus Protocol Coverage
      • Block Level Coverage
      • Datapath Coverage
      • SoC Coverage Example
      • Requirements Writing Guidelines
      • Coverage Cookbook
  • All Events
    No one argues that the challenges of verification are growing exponentially. What is needed to meet these challenges are tools, methodologies and processes that can help you transform your verification environment. These recorded seminars from Verification Academy trainers and users provide examples for adoption of new technologies and how to evolve your verification process.
    • Featured & On-Demand

      • Continuous Integration - March 28th
      • SystemVerilog Assertions
      • SoC Design & Functional Safety Flow
      • 2022 Functional Verification Study
      • Design Solutions as a Sleep Aid
      • CDC and RDC Assist
      • Formal and the Next Normal
      • Protocol and Memory Interface Verification
      • Webinar Calendar
    • On-Demand Library

      • Practical Flows for Continuous Integration
      • Lint vs Formal AutoCheck
      • The Three Pillars of Intent-Focused Insight
      • Formal Verification Made Easy
      • Fix FPGA Failures Faster
      • HPC Protocols & Memories
      • FPGA Design Challenges
      • High Defect Coverage
      • The Dog ate my RTL
      • Questa Lint & CDC
      • Complex Safety Architectures
      • Data Independence and Non-Determinism
      • Hierarchical CDC+RDC
      • All On-Demand Recordings
    • Recording Archive

      • Aerospace & Defense Tech Day
      • Exhaustive Scoreboarding
      • Improving Initial RTL Quality
      • CDC Philosophy
      • Hardware Emulation Productivity
      • Visualizer Debug Environment
      • Preparing for PCIe 6.0: Parts I & II
      • Automotive Functional Safety Forum
      • Siemens EDA Functional Verification
      • Improving Your SystemVerilog & UVM Skills
      • All Webinar Topics
    • Conferences & WRG

      • Industry Data & Surveys
      • DVCon 2023
      • DVCon 2022
      • DVCon 2021
      • Osmosis 2022
      • All Conferences
    • Siemens EDA Learning Center

      • SystemVerilog Fundamentals
      • SystemVerilog UVM
      • EDA Xcelerator Academy(Learning Services) Verification Training, Badging and Certification
      • View all Learning Paths
  • About Verification Academy
    The Verification Academy will provide you with a unique opportunity to develop an understanding of how to mature your organization's processes so that you can then reap the benefits that advanced functional verification offers.
    • Blog & News

      • Verification IQ
      • Verification Horizons Blog
      • Technical Resources
    • Verification Horizons Publication

      • Verification Horizons - March 2023
      • Verification Horizons - December 2022
      • Verification Horizons - July 2022
      • Issue Archive
    • About Us

      • Verification Academy Overview
      • Subject Matter Experts
      • Academy News
      • Contact Us
    • Training

      • Learning @OneGlance (PDF)
      • SystemVerilog & UVM Classes
      • Siemens EDA Classes
  • Home
  • Verification Horizons
  • November 2015 | Volume 11, Issue 3

November 2015 | Volume 11, Issue 3

Verification Horizons - Tom Fitzpatrick, Editor

Verification Horizons Complete Issue:

  • Download - 9.7 MB

Welcome to the 10th Anniversary edition of Verification Horizons!

by Tom Fitzpatrick, Editor and Verification Technologist, Mentor Graphics Corporation

Welcome to the 10th Anniversary edition of Verification Horizons! It's hard to believe we've been doing this long enough to reach such a significant milestone, but it's been a great ride. For me personally, this issue marks two significant milestones as well.

My son and I reached the pinnacle of our Boy Scout experience this past summer when we successfully completed a 10-day 80-mile hike at the Philmont Scout Ranch in New Mexico, including reaching the 12,441 ft. summit of Baldy Mountain. Please indulge me in a bit of fatherly pride when I tell you that the highlight of the trip was sharing the experience with my son. The other major milestone is that my daughter has just started high school.

She's quickly gotten involved in the Drama Club and was cast in the fall play, which is a milestone I'm sure she'll remember for a long time. We are very proud of how well she's handled this transition in her life, despite the fact that it makes my wife and me feel old that our youngest is now in high school.

As with everything, milestones mark the end of one phase and the beginning of another.

As much as we've enjoyed sharing so many articles about verification techniques and technology with you over the years, we look forward to continuing that mission as we advance to our next milestone.

Memories Are Made Like This

by Mark Peryer, Verification IP Architect, Mentor Graphics

One of the most common requirements for the verification of a chip, board or system is to be able to model the behaviour of memory components, and this is why memory models are one of the most prevalent types of Verification IP (VIP).

Memory models have two main functions. The first is to store information in a data structure so that it can be written, retrieved and updated. The second is to provide a signal level interface which allows access to the storage array using a pre-defined protocol (see figure 1 for a representative functional block diagram). For effective verification the model should also check that the signal level protocol from the host interface is behaving correctly, provide a backdoor access to the storage array and provide a means of collecting functional coverage.

Over the years, memory devices such as Dynamic RAMs (DRAM) have driven semiconductor process development as manufacturers have sought to create faster memories with a greater storage capacity through the use of smaller feature sizes. Over time, several different memory protocols have been developed to optimise the various trade-offs between device access speed and packaging costs, and today, one of the most widely used protocols is the Double Data Rate (DDR) memory protocol, and its low power variant, LPDDR. The DDR protocol is designed for high speed access, with data being transferred on both edges of the clock. However, in practice, this high level of throughput can only be achieved by managing the DDR accesses so that the time and power expensive operations such as activate and pre-charge can be taking place in one part of the memory whilst a data transfer takes place with another part of the memory. It is the task of a DDR controller to order the operations taking place in the DDR device to maximise throughput, and in order to verify the complex trade-offs a sophisticated memory model is needed.

A New Stimulus Model for CPU Instruction Sets

by Staffan Berg, European Applications Engineer, and Mike Andrews, Verification Technologist, Mentor Graphics

Verifying that a specific implementation of a processor is fully compliant with the specification is a difficult task. Due to the very large total stimuli space it is difficult, if not impossible, to ensure that every architectural and micro-architectural feature has been exercised. Typical approaches involve collecting large test-suites of real SW, as well as using program generators based on constrained- random generation of instruction streams, but there are drawbacks to each.

SystemVerilog Constrained-Random (CR) 'single class with constraints on all possible fields approach' can be unwieldy and hard for solvers to handle, especially when dealing with a series of instructions with many for each constraint. Slow solving performance, testbench bugs hidden in the complexity, or simply not having the flexibility to fully describe the wanted scenarios for verification are quite common issues. When the problem is adequately modeled, achieving significant coverage is close to impossible. There are custom options other than SV CR – creating an instruction stream generator from scratch, for example C++ may seem like a viable option, but the complexity and vast solution space quickly makes this approach unmanageable. Moreover, languages like C++ have no notion of functional coverage, which makes it hard or impossible to assess when the verification is complete.

On-Chip Debug – Reducing Overall ASIC Development Schedule Risk

by Eric Rentschler, Chief Validation Scientist, Mentor Graphics

With ASIC complexity on the increase and unrelenting time-to-market pressure, many silicon design teams still face serious schedule risk from unplanned spins and long post-silicon debug cycles. However, there are opportunities on both the pre-silicon and post-silicon sides that can be systematically improved using on-chip debug solutions. In the pre-silicon world, there exists a great opportunity for a solution that can provide more cycles of execution than what is possible today with simulation and emulation. But in the past, functions like power management span HW, FW, BIOS, virtualization and OS levels and are difficult to cover until silicon hardware is available. The most recent industry tape-out data shows that despite the use of state-of-the art pre-silicon verification techniques, the number of spins to get to market is not only higher than planned, but is not improving over time. On the post-silicon side, the black-box complexity of today’s designs calls for enhanced internal observation. Many design teams could benefit by enhanced debug logic. A more intuitive debug GUI can enable higher productivity through quicker adoption. The Certus™ on-chip logic analyzer solution addresses much of this in a systematic manner as an off-the-shelf solution. Certus can be deployed in FPGA or in ASIC silicon, with an easy-to-use GUI for instrumenting the debug logic and interacting with the instruments in silicon. After a decades-long legacy of EDA improvements in test, verification and physical design, Mentor is bridging the gap into the post-silicon realm. This makes cross-functional teams significantly more productive and reduces schedule risk, while allowing teams to focus more on their core business.

Hardware Emulation: Three Decades of Evolution—Part III

by Dr. Lauro Rizzatti, Verification Consultant, Rizzatti LLC

At the beginning of the third decade, circa 2005, system and chip engineers were developing evermore complex designs that mixed many interconnected blocks, embedded multicore processors, digital signal processors (DSPs) and a plethora of peripherals, supported by large memories. The combination of all of these components gave real meaning to the designation system on chip (SoC). The sizes of the largest designs were pushing north of 100-million gates. Embedded software—once virtually absent in ASIC designs—started to implement chip functionality.

By the end of the hardware emulation's third decade, i.e., 2015, the largest designs are reaching into the billion-gate region, and well over 50% of functionality is now realized in software. Design verification continues to consume between 50% and 70% of the design cycle.

These trends became tremendous drivers for hardware emulator vendors to redesign and enhance their tools, opening the door to opportunities in all fields of the semiconductor business, from multimedia, to networking, to storage.

QVIP Provides Thoroughness in Verification

by Kiran Sharma, Sr. Verification Engineer and Vipin Kumar, Sr. Verification Engineer, Agnisys Technology Pvt. Ltd.

The present day designs use standard interfaces for the connection and management of functional blocks in System on Chips (SoCs). These interface protocols are so complex that, creating in-house VIPs could take a lot of engineer's development time. A fully verified interface should include all the complex protocol compliance checking, generation and application of different test case scenarios, etc.

Our tool IDesignSpec automatically generates registers and memory interfaces which can interface with all the standard bus protocols. One of the outputs from IDesignSpec product is the Bus client RTL. The generation of this IP is challenging since what gets generated is based on the specification that the user provides.

For the reliability and credibility of our design, we need to ensure that it is fully compliant with the standard protocol. Testing out such dynamic designs is a huge task since the customer can create virtually any possible specification. So it is not a static IP that needs to be verified, nor is it a configurable IP. It really is a generated IP, so the task is an order of magnitude, more complicated.

Minimizing Constraints to Debug Vacuous Proofs

by Anshul Jain, Verification Engineer, Oski Technology

Most false positives (i.e. missing design bugs) during the practice of model checking on industrial designs can be reduced to the problem of a failing cover. Debugging the root cause of such a failing cover can be a laborious process, when the formal testbench has many constraints. This article describes a solution to minimize the number of model checking runs to isolate a minimal set of constraints necessary for the failure. This helps improve formal verification productivity.

Formal verification in the form of model checking has become an integral part of the chip design sign-off process at many semiconductor companies. The process involves building formal testbenches that can exhaustively verify certain design units. This process complements the simulation testbenches that typically run at full-chip or subsystem level.

There can be many reasons why any verification methodology (simulation or formal) can give rise to false negatives or false positives, undermining the confidence built by the verification process. False negatives are typically less worrisome because they are accompanied by a failure report or a counterexample that can be analyzed to determine if the root cause is a design bug. False positives in formal verification are important to eliminate, and often debugging the root cause of such false positives can be very tedious.

A Generic UVM Scoreboard

by Jacob Andersen, CTO, Kevin Seffensen, Consultant and UVM Specialist, Peter Jensen, Managing Director, SyoSil ApS

All UVM engineers employ scoreboarding for checking DUT/reference model behavior, but only few spend their time wisely by employing an existing scoreboard architecture. The main reason is that existing frameworks have inadequately served user needs, and have failed to improve user effectiveness in the debug situation. This article presents a better UVM scoreboard framework, focusing on scalability, architectural separation and connectivity to foreign environments. Our scoreboard architecture has successfully been used in UVM testbenches at various architectural levels and across models (RTL, SC). Based on our work, the SV/UVM user ecosystem will be able to improve how scoreboards are designed, configured and reused across projects, applications and models/architectural levels.

Addressing the increasing challenges met when performing functional verification, UVM 1 proposes a robust and productive approach for how to build and reuse verification components, environments and sequences/tests. When it comes to describing how to scoreboard and check the behavior of your design against one or more reference models, UVM offers less help. UVM does not present a scoreboard architecture, but leaves the implementer to extend the empty uvm_scoreboard base class into a custom scoreboard that connects to analysis ports. Experience shows that custom scoreboard implementations across different application domains contain lots of common denominators of deficiency. Users struggle to implement checker mechanisms for the designs under test being exposed to random stimuli, while sacrificing aspects like efficiency, easy debug and a clean implementation.

← Back to Verification Horizons

Siemens Digital Industries Software

Siemens Digital Industries Software

#TodayMeetsTomorrow

Portfolio

  • Cloud
  • Mendix
  • Electronic Design Automation
  • MindSphere
  • Design, Manufacturing and PLM Software
  • View all Portfolio

Explore

  • Community
  • Blog
  • Online Store

Siemens

  • About Us
  • Careers
  • Events
  • News and Press
  • Customer Stories
  • Partners
  • Trust Center

Contact

  • VA - Contact Us
  • PLM - Contact Us
  • EDA - Contact Us
  • Worldwide Offices
  • Support Center
  • Give us Feedback
© Siemens 2023
Terms of Use Privacy Statement Cookie Statement DMCA