MIPI UniPro: Comprehensive Verification Checklist
We at Arrow Devices are committed to help developers build happy and robust standard interface IP. We are starting with MIPI UniPro today.
As part of this initiative we have prepared the following actionable questionnaire and downloadable test plan that lists more than 600 test cases. All it takes is to answer the questionnaire and follow it up with five steps action plan of cross-referencing your verification plan with the test plan provided. The intent is to get to a single number (Verifcation Score), that will enable Managers, Technical leads, Verification engineers and those paranoid finger crossed designers to evaluate the strength of their verification plan. There by helping reduce the risk of new designs and increase the robustness of existing designs, by ensuring that none of the key items are missed.
Following verification checklist has been prepared for the MIPI UniPro Specification version 1.41. MIPI UniPro stack has 4 layers. Each layer requires its own verification strategy, which involves choosing the right combination of directed test cases and constrained random test cases. The following sections describe the verification strategy and focus areas for each layer.
Related Semiconductor IP
- TSMC 7nm 0V75 / 0V9 ESD Local Clamp – Low Cap
- TSMC 65nm 3V3 ESD Local Clamp – Rad Hard
- TSMC 5nm 1V8, 1.2V and 0.9V ESD Local Protection – Low Cap
- TSMC 3nm 3V3 ESD Local Clamp
- TSMC 3nm 1V2 ESD Local Clamp – Low Capacitance
Related Blogs
- MIPI UniPro through eyes of PCI Express
- MIPI Unipro Transport Layer (L4) - An Introduction
- Technical Comparison: MIPI UniPro 1.6 vs MIPI UniPro 1.41
- Specification Ambiguities of MIPI UniPro v1.41 clarified in MIPI UniPro v1.6
Latest Blogs
- Beyond Trusted: What the NSA’s New Guidance Means for Hardware Security
- A scalable, shader-programmable vector graphics GPU core for low-power MCUs
- Navigating ISO 26262 Part 11: A Guide for Semiconductor Architects
- Embedded Security explained: Digital signatures
- Hardware security verification must go beyond functional testing