OOPs! 3 Issues That Show System Verilog Threads are Not OOP Safe!
Verilog has a very limited and simple hierarchy. All processes are present in static modules. In some ways, System Verilog extends this concept of hierarchy with the support for dynamic data type of class. In System Verilog processes are also present inside dynamic objects. System Verilog updates to fork-join constructs, make the process more flexible and dynamic.
However, this also increases complexity of using processes in System Verilog. What makes it tricky is process usage in the context of object oriented programming. I know that sounds counter intuitive. Object Oriented Programming is good, right? What I mean is, not all the constructs of System Verilog are compatible with object-oriented interpretation. This limited support of object-oriented programming leads to confusion.
In this article I plan to provide the details of three such sources of confusion I have faced. I start off with a refresher about the updates to the fork-join construct in System Verilog. The refresher is followed by top three sources of confusion with examples.
Related Semiconductor IP
- LPDDR6/5X/5 PHY V2 - Intel 18A-P
- MIPI SoundWire I3S Peripheral IP
- LPDDR6/5X/5 Controller IP
- Post-Quantum ML-KEM IP Core
- MIPI SoundWire I3S Manager IP
Related Blogs
- 3 Reasons That the Semiconductor Clouds Are Gathering
- Qualcomm: Scaling down is not cost-economic anymore - so we are looking at true monolithic 3D
- Six Issues that will Inhibit Profitable Growth in 2010 - Be Ready
- 70% of re-spin issues are AMS in nature: How mixed-signal design can mess up a perfectly good SoC
Latest Blogs
- ML-DSA explained: Quantum-Safe digital Signatures for secure embedded Systems
- Efficiency Defines The Future Of Data Movement
- Why Standard-Cell Architecture Matters for Adaptable ASIC Designs
- ML-KEM explained: Quantum-safe Key Exchange for secure embedded Hardware
- Rivos Collaborates to Complete Secure Provisioning of Integrated OpenTitan Root of Trust During SoC Production