Abstract
The recent trend towards system-level design gives rise to new challenges for reusing existing (RTL) intellectual properties (IPs) and their verification environment in (TLM). While techniques and tools to abstract (RTL) IPs into TLM models have begun to appear, the problem of reusing, at TLM, a verification environment originally developed for an RTL IP is still under-explored, particularly when (ABV) is adopted. Some frameworks have been proposed to deal with ABV at TLM, but they assume a top-down design and verification flow, where assertions are defined ex-novo at TLM level. In contrast, the reuse of existing assertions in an RTL-to-TLM bottom-up design flow has not been analyzed yet, except by using transactors to create a mixed simulation between the TLM design and the RTL checkers corresponding to the assertions. However, the use of transactors may lead to longer verification time due to the need of developing and verifying the transactors themselves. Moreover, the simulation time is negatively affected by the presence of transactors, which slow down the simulation at the speed of the slowest parts (i.e., RTL checkers). This article proposes an alternative methodology that does not require transactors for reusing assertions, originally defined for a given RTL IP, in order to verify the corresponding TLM model. Experimental results have been conducted on benchmarks with different characteristics and complexity to show the applicability and the efficiency of the proposed methodology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
It is worth noting that the proposed methodology is independent from the checker generator employed in this step.
References
Abarbanel Y, Beer I, Glushovsky L, Keidar S, Wolfsthal Y (2000) FoCs: automatic generation of simulation checkers from formal specifications. In: Proceedings of CAV, pp 538– 542
Accellera (2004) Property specification language reference manual. http://www.accellera.org
Bombieri N, Deganello N, Fummi F (2008) Integrating RTL IPs into TLM designs through automatic transactor generation. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE DATE, pp 15–20
Bombieri N, Fummi F, Pravadelli G (2006) On the evaluation of transactor-based verification for reusing TLM assertions and testbenches at RTL. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE DATE,pp 1–6
Bombieri N, Fummi F, Pravadelli G (2007) Incremental ABV for functional validation of TL-to-RTL design refinement. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE DATE, pp 882– 887
Bombieri N, Fummi F, Pravadelli G (2011) Automatic abstraction of RTL IPs into equivalent TLM descriptions. IEEE Trans Comput 60(12):1730–1743
Bombieri N, Fummi F, Pravadelli G, Fedeli A (2007) Hybrid, incremental assertion-based verification for TLM design flows. IEEE Design and Test 24(2):140–152
Bombieri N, Fummi F, Pravadelli G, Marques-Silva J (2007) Towards Equivalence Checking Between TLM and RTL Models. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE MEMOCODE, pp 113– 122
Boulé M, Zilic Z (2008) Generating hardware assertion checkers: for hardware verification, emulation, post-fabrication debugging and on-line monitoring. Springer
Cai L, Gajski D (2003) Transaction Level Modelling: An Overview. In: IEEE/ACM CODES+ISSS, pp 19–24
Carbon Design Systems Carbon Model Studio. http://carbondesignsystems.com/
Chen M, Mishra P (2013) Assertion-based functional consistency checking between TLM and RTL models. In: Proceedings of IEEE VLSID, pp 320–325
Clarke E M, Emerson E A, Sifakis J (2009) Model checking: algorithmic verification and debugging. Commun ACM 52(11)
Das S, Roberts D, Lee S, Pant S, Blaauw D, Austin T, Flautner K, Mudge T (2006). A self-tuning DVS processor using delay-error detection and correction 41(4):792– 804
Ecker W, Esen V, Hull M (2007) Implementation of a transaction level assertion framework in SystemC. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM DATE pp 894–899
Ecker W, Esen V, Hull M (2006) Execution semantics and formalism for multi-abstraction TLM assertions, pp 93–102
Ecker W, Esen V, Hull M (2006) Requirements and concepts for transaction level assertions. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICCD, pp 286–293
Ecker W, Esen V, Steininger T, Velten M, Hull M (2006) Specification Language for Transaction Level Assertions. In: Proceedings of IEEE HLDVT, pp 77–84
EDALab HIFSuite. http://www.hifsuite.com/
Ferro L, Pierre L, Ledru Y, du Bousquet L (2008) Generation of test programs for the assertion-based verification of TLM models. In: Proceedings of IEEE IDT, pp 237–242
Ferro L, Pierre L (2010) Formal semantics for PSL modelling layer and application to the verification of transactional models. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE DATE, pp 1207– 1212
Ferro L, Laurence (2009) ISIS: runtime verification of TLM platforms. In: Proceedings of FDL, pp 1–6
Fujita M (2005) Equivalence checking between behavioral and RTL descriptions with virtual controllers and datapaths. ACM TODAES 10(4):610–626
Ghofrani A, Javahery F, Navabi Z (2010) Assertion based verification in TLM. In: Proceedings of IEEE EWDTS, pp 509– 513
Grosse D, Le H, Drechsler R (2010) Proving transaction and system-level properties of untimed SystemC TLM designs. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM MEMOCODE, pp 113– 122
Habibi A, Tahar S (2006) Design and verification of SystemC transaction-level models. IEEE Trans VLSI Syst 14(1):57–67
IBM FoCs property checkers generator. https://www.research.ibm.com/haifa/projects/verification/focs/start.html
IEEE standard systemC language reference manual (2006). http://ieeexplore.ieee.org
Kallel M, Lahbib Y, Tourki R, Baganne A (2009) Aspect-based ABV for SystemC transaction level models. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICM, pp 304–307
Kallel M, Lahbib Y, Tourki R, Baganne A (2010) Verification of SystemC transaction level models using an aspect-oriented and generic approach. In: Proceedings of IEEE DTIS, pp 1–6
Kasuya A, Tesfaye T (2007) Verification methodologies in a TLM-to-RTL design flow. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE DAC, pp 199–204
Lahbib Y, Kamdem R, Benalycherif M-l, Tourki R (2005) An automatic ABV methodology enabling PSL assertions across SLD flow for SOCs modelled in SystemC. Comput Electr Eng 31(4-5):282–302
Lahbib Y, Ghrab M-A, Hechkel M, Ghenassia F, Tourki R (2006) A new synchronization policy between PSL checkers and SystemC designs at transaction level. In: Proceedings of IEEE DTIS, pp 85–90
Mathur A, Krishnaswamy V (2007) Design for Verification in System-level Models and RTL. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM DAC, pp 193–198
Pierre L, Amor ZBH (2013) Automatic refinement of requirements for verification throughout the SoC design flow. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE CODES+ISSS, pp 1–10
Pierre L, Ferro L (2008) A Tractable and Fast Method for Monitoring SystemC TLM Specifications. IEEE Trans Comput 57(10):1346–1356
Pierre L, Ferro L (2010) Enhancing the assertion-based verification of TLM designs with reentrancy. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE MEMOCODE, pp 103–112
Pnueli A, Zaks A (2006) PSL model checking and run-time verification via testers. In: FM 2006: formal methods. Springer, pp 573–586
Smith DJ (1996) VHDL & Verilog compared & contrasted - plus modelled example written in VHDL, Verilog and C. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE DAC, pp 771– 776
Xiong Z, Bian J, Zhao Y (2010) An assertion-based verification method for SystemC TLM. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICCCAS, pp 842–846
Acknowledgments
This work has been partially supported by the European project SMAC (SMArt systems Co-design) FP7-ICT-2011-7-288827.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible Editor: L. M. Bolzani Pöhls
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bombieri, N., Fummi, F., Guarnieri, V. et al. Reusing RTL Assertion Checkers for Verification of SystemC TLM Models. J Electron Test 31, 167–180 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10836-015-5514-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10836-015-5514-8