| Improvements for constraint solving in the systemc verification library |
| Full text |
Pdf
(228 KB)
|
| Source
|
Great Lakes Symposium on VLSI
archive
Proceedings of the 17th ACM Great Lakes symposium on VLSI
table of contents
Stresa-Lago Maggiore, Italy
POSTER SESSION: Poster session 2
table of contents
Pages: 493 - 496
Year of Publication: 2007
ISBN:978-1-59593-605-9
|
|
Authors
|
|
| Sponsors |
|
| Publisher |
|
| Bibliometrics |
Downloads (6 Weeks): 1, Downloads (12 Months): 24, Citation Count: 1
|
|
|
ABSTRACT
For verification of complex system-on-chip designs often constraint-based randomization is used. This allows to simulate scenarios that may be difficult to generate manually. For the system description language SystemC the SystemC Verification (SCV) Library has been introduced. Besides advanced verification features like data introspection and transaction recording the SCV library enables constraint-based randomization forSystemC models. However, the SCV library has two disadvantages that restrict their practical use: There is no support of bit operators in SCV constraintsand the SCV constraint solver cannot guarantee a uniform distribution of the constraint solutions. In this paper we provide a detailed analysis of these problems and present solutions that have been integrated in the library.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
 |
1
|
Karl S. Brace , Richard L. Rudell , Randal E. Bryant, Efficient implementation of a BDD package, Proceedings of the 27th ACM/IEEE conference on Design automation, p.40-45, June 24-27, 1990, Orlando, Florida, United States
[doi> 10.1145/123186.123222]
|
| |
2
|
|
 |
3
|
Robert S. French , Monica S. Lam , Jeremy R. Levitt , Kunle Olukotun, A general method for compiling event-driven simulations, Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE conference on Design automation, p.151-156, June 12-16, 1995, San Francisco, California, United States
[doi> 10.1145/217474.217522]
|
| |
4
|
D. Große, R. Siegmund, and R. Drechsler. Processor verification. In PIenne and RLeupers, editors, Customizable Embedded Processors, pages 281--302. Elsevier, 2006.
|
| |
5
|
|
| |
6
|
C.N. Ip and S. Swan. A tutorial introduction on the new SystemC verification standard. http://www.systemc.org. White paper, 2003.
|
| |
7
|
W. Müller, W. Rosenstiel, and J. Ruf, editors. SystemC Methodologies and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003.
|
| |
8
|
J. Rose and S. Swan. SCV randomization version 1.0. 2003.
|
| |
9
|
R. Siegmund, U. Hensel, A. Herrholz, and I. Volt. A functional coverage prototype for SystemC-based verification of chipset designs. In 9th European SystemC User Group Meeting at Design, Automation and Test in Europe, 2004.
|
| |
10
|
F. Somenzi. CUDD: CU Decision Diagram Package Release 2.3.0. University of Colorado at Boulder, 1998.
|
| |
11
|
Synopsys Inc., CoWare Inc., and Frontier Design Inc., http://www.systemc.org. Functional Specification for SystemC 2.0.
|
| |
12
|
SystemC Verification Working Group, http://www.systemc.org. SystemC Verification Standard Specification Version 1.0e.
|
| |
13
|
|
|