|
Shrinking silicon geometries enable larger system‐on‐chip (SoC)‐type designs in terms of raw gate size, and many of today’s applications take advantage of this trend. An important point that is often missed is the accompanying growth in verification complexity. Indeed, the verification task for a design that is twice as big is actually more than doubled. The verification team has to deal with a bigger state‐space and the application, which is what the verification environment attempts to mimic, gets much “bigger”. Simply building faster tools like simulators will not solve this problem. Rather, it requires capabilities and associated methodologies that make it easier to set up complex verification environments – environments that in the end ensure that the application on the chip works as expected. Fortunately, SystemVerilog provides a compelling advantage in addressing the complexity challenge ‐ not simply as a new language for describing complex structures, but as a platform for enabling advanced methodologies and automation. Each of the three key aspects of SystemVerilog has a significant role. The synthesizable design constructs that have been added to SystemVerilog make it possible for designers to code at a higher level of abstraction, often mapping more accurately to the function they are designing and the way they think about it. The new assertions capability allows users to very concisely describe a behavior that needs to be checked. But it is the verification aspect that provides the biggest bang for the buck, as evidenced by its rapid adoption. The verification component of SystemVerilog brings high‐level programming capability to design and verification teams. In the past, many teams utilized a C/C++ testbench, native or SystemCbased, to drive a more efficient, realistic test of the design. SystemVerilog brings structure to this process by providing a standard object‐oriented language with which to do the same. Tools can now be developed to support a more standard, structured process in a way that is not intimidating to the engineers, who previously coded in Verilog or VHDL and are not familiar with a language such as C++. The SystemVerilog testbench (SVTB) language still resembles Verilog code for the most part. Additionally, it includes built‐in support for functionality that is commonly needed during verification, such as constrained randomization and coverage monitoring. The relatively simple notion of constrained randomization allows engineers to develop sophisticated test scenarios with very few lines of code. It is also a natural progression of the object‐oriented model that spurs development of standard class libraries and related OVM (Open Verification Methodology) and VMM (Verification Methodology Manual) methodologies. These enable engineers to create modular, reusable verification environments in which components communicate with each other via standard transaction‐level modeling interfaces. They also enable intra‐ and inter‐company reuse through a common methodology and classes for virtual sequences and block‐to‐system reuse. This reuse can be extended to off‐the‐shelf verification intellectual property (IP) components that can be used to verify specific functionality such as bus protocols like USB.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
