|
Industry-standard methodologies are great, really. It would be so nice if our entire verification environment (VE) were OVM-e (eRM) compliant, wouldn’t it? But what if there are legacy components in our env that don’t follow any specific methodology and we still want to make them speak OVM-e?
|
|
|
Progressive Coverage is a method of coverage collection that’s highly applicable in communication devices, but may as well be applied elsewhere. Now before I start to babble about my philosophy on coverage collection why don't I just give you an example?
|
|
There is a rather confusing feature in Specman’s coverage engine that I would like to share with you today. I’ve met several people (including myself) who had been struggling to understand what was going on there and gave up Recently I was called to the rescue again with the same problem so I guess it’s a good opportunity to tell you guys about it.
|
|
|
You know what they way - sometimes small things can make a big difference. Setting your A/C thermostat to a reasonable temperature can help save energy, sending flowers to someone you care about and so on. This is also true in programming. Sometimes even a seemingly redundant single line of code could make a big difference. I’m not talking about the core logic of your code, I’m talking about something so simple and straight-forward that we may tend to forget about its existence. I’m talking about the habit of writing assertions in your code.
|
|
Wow, it’s been a while since we last had a good old techie talk about Specman so why not now? Today I’d like to focus on applying reuse to Specman external ports. Very much like little caterpillars, DUTs often have tens or even hundreds of pins which can usually be divided into groups and sub-groups based on their functionality. Certain sub-groups may form a bus - data bus, address bus, and so on - in which case it wouldn’t be as interesting to look at individual wires or pins as at the entire bus as a group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 3 of 4 |
Tutorials
