The Complicated Chip Design Verification Landscape
By Bipul Talukdar, director of applications engineering for North America, SmartDV
While a working device that meets all functional specifications is a chip design project group’s No. 1 goal, many designers wake up covered in sweat worrying about a dead-on-arrival chip. No matter how much coverage or how many verification tools are employed, a bug or multiple bugs could slip through the net.
This high-pressure, demanding engineering environment requires three independent technology-based verification tools at the functional level to guarantee a bug-free functional and highly reliable chip. The overlap in verification and test coverage may seem to be excessive. Many sleep-deprived designers believe the additional effort is worthwhile.
The three functional-level verification steps –– functional verification, functional test, and built-in self-test (BIST) –– each offer a sense of confidence in the chip’s design. Combining them triples the sense of confidence that the chip will work as the functional spec intended.
Functional verification is the most resource-hungry step because it uses an abundance of available EDA tools and plenty of the hours budgeted for verification. Functional verification must encompass both functional coverage and code coverage. The two approach the verification problem differently and are necessary for ensuring comprehensive verification.
To read the full article, click here
Related Semiconductor IP
- ASIL-B Ready PUF Hardware Premium with key wrap and certification support
- ASIL-B Ready PUF Hardware Base
- PUF Software Premium with key wrap and certification support
- PUF Hardware Premium with key wrap and certification support
- Ku-Band Phased Array Tx-FE in TSMC 180nm RF
Related White Papers
- Differentiation Through the Chip Design and Verification Flow
- The Future Of Chip Design
- IC design: A short primer on the formal methods-based verification
- AI, and the Real Capacity Crisis in Chip Design
Latest White Papers
- e-GPU: An Open-Source and Configurable RISC-V Graphic Processing Unit for TinyAI Applications
- How to design secure SoCs, Part II: Key Management
- Seven Key Advantages of Implementing eFPGA with Soft IP vs. Hard IP
- Hardware vs. Software Implementation of Warp-Level Features in Vortex RISC-V GPU
- Data Movement Is the Energy Bottleneck of Today’s SoCs