Verilog IEEE Standard 1364-2005
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Prostep Ivip CPO Statement Template
CPO Statement of Mentor Graphics For Questa SIM Date: 17 June, 2015 CPO Statement of Mentor Graphics Following the prerequisites of ProSTEP iViP’s Code of PLM Openness (CPO) IT vendors shall determine and provide a list of their relevant products and the degree of fulfillment as a “CPO Statement” (cf. CPO Chapter 2.8). This CPO Statement refers to: Product Name Questa SIM Product Version Version 10 Contact Ellie Burns [email protected] This CPO Statement was created and published by Mentor Graphics in form of a self-assessment with regard to the CPO. Publication Date of this CPO Statement: 17 June 2015 Content 1 Executive Summary ______________________________________________________________________________ 2 2 Details of Self-Assessment ________________________________________________________________________ 3 2.1 CPO Chapter 2.1: Interoperability ________________________________________________________________ 3 2.2 CPO Chapter 2.2: Infrastructure _________________________________________________________________ 4 2.3 CPO Chapter 2.5: Standards ____________________________________________________________________ 4 2.4 CPO Chapter 2.6: Architecture __________________________________________________________________ 5 2.5 CPO Chapter 2.7: Partnership ___________________________________________________________________ 6 2.5.1 Data Generated by Users ___________________________________________________________________ 6 2.5.2 Partnership Models _______________________________________________________________________ 6 2.5.3 Support of -
Systemverilog
SystemVerilog ● Industry's first unified HDVL (Hw Description and Verification language (IEEE 1800) ● Major extension of Verilog language (IEEE 1364) ● Targeted primarily at the chip implementation and verification flow ● Improve productivity in the design of large gate-count, IP- based, bus-intensive chips Sources and references 1. Accellera IEEE SystemVerilog page http://www.systemverilog.com/home.html 2. “Using SystemVerilog for FPGA design. A tutorial based on a simple bus system”, Doulos http://www.doulos.com/knowhow/sysverilog/FPGA/ 3. “SystemVerilog for Design groups”, Slides from Doulos training course 4. Various tutorials on SystemVerilog on Doulos website 5. “SystemVerilog for VHDL Users”, Tom Fitzpatrick, Synopsys Principal Technical Specialist, Date04 http://www.systemverilog.com/techpapers/date04_systemverilog.pdf 6. “SystemVerilog, a design and synthesis perspective”, K. Pieper, Synopsys R&D Manager, HDL Compilers 7. Wikipedia Extensions to Verilog ● Improvements for advanced design requirements – Data types – Higher abstraction (user defined types, struct, unions) – Interfaces ● Properties and assertions built in the language – Assertion Based Verification, Design for Verification ● New features for verification – Models and testbenches using object-oriented techniques (class) – Constrained random test generation – Transaction level modeling ● Direct Programming Interface with C/C++/SystemC – Link to system level simulations Data types: logic module counter (input logic clk, ● Nets and Variables reset, ● enable, Net type, -
Gotcha Again More Subtleties in the Verilog and Systemverilog Standards That Every Engineer Should Know
Gotcha Again More Subtleties in the Verilog and SystemVerilog Standards That Every Engineer Should Know Stuart Sutherland Sutherland HDL, Inc. [email protected] Don Mills LCDM Engineering [email protected] Chris Spear Synopsys, Inc. [email protected] ABSTRACT The definition of gotcha is: “A misfeature of....a programming language...that tends to breed bugs or mistakes because it is both enticingly easy to invoke and completely unexpected and/or unreasonable in its outcome. A classic gotcha in C is the fact that ‘if (a=b) {code;}’ is syntactically valid and sometimes even correct. It puts the value of b into a and then executes code if a is non-zero. What the programmer probably meant was ‘if (a==b) {code;}’, which executes code if a and b are equal.” (http://www.hyperdictionary.com/computing/gotcha). This paper documents 38 gotchas when using the Verilog and SystemVerilog languages. Some of these gotchas are obvious, and some are very subtle. The goal of this paper is to reveal many of the mysteries of Verilog and SystemVerilog, and help engineers understand the important underlying rules of the Verilog and SystemVerilog languages. The paper is a continuation of a paper entitled “Standard Gotchas: Subtleties in the Verilog and SystemVerilog Standards That Every Engineer Should Know” that was presented at the Boston 2006 SNUG conference [1]. SNUG San Jose 2007 1 More Gotchas in Verilog and SystemVerilog Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................3 2.0 Design modeling gotchas .......................................................................................................4 2.1 Overlapped decision statements ................................................................................... 4 2.2 Inappropriate use of unique case statements ............................................................... -
Development of Systemc Modules from HDL for System-On-Chip Applications
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2004 Development of SystemC Modules from HDL for System-on-Chip Applications Siddhartha Devalapalli University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Devalapalli, Siddhartha, "Development of SystemC Modules from HDL for System-on-Chip Applications. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2004. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2119 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Siddhartha Devalapalli entitled "Development of SystemC Modules from HDL for System-on-Chip Applications." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Electrical Engineering. Dr. Donald W. Bouldin, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Dr. Gregory D. Peterson, Dr. Chandra Tan Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Siddhartha Devalapalli entitled "Development of SystemC Modules from HDL for System-on-Chip Applications". -
Lattice Synthesis Engine User Guide and Reference Manual
Lattice Synthesis Engine for Diamond User Guide April, 2019 Copyright Copyright © 2019 Lattice Semiconductor Corporation. All rights reserved. This document may not, in whole or part, be reproduced, modified, distributed, or publicly displayed without prior written consent from Lattice Semiconductor Corporation (“Lattice”). Trademarks All Lattice trademarks are as listed at www.latticesemi.com/legal. Synopsys and Synplify Pro are trademarks of Synopsys, Inc. Aldec and Active-HDL are trademarks of Aldec, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Disclaimers NO WARRANTIES: THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS “AS IS” WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY OF ANY KIND INCLUDING WARRANTIES OF ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY, NONINFRINGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT WILL LATTICE OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER (WHETHER DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, OR LOSS OF INFORMATION) ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS DOCUMENT, EVEN IF LATTICE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. BECAUSE SOME JURISDICTIONS PROHIBIT THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF CERTAIN LIABILITY, SOME OF THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. Lattice may make changes to these materials, specifications, or information, or to the products described herein, at any time without notice. Lattice makes no commitment to update this documentation. Lattice reserves the right to discontinue any product or service without notice and assumes no obligation to correct any errors contained herein or to advise any user of this document of any correction if such be made. -
Powerplay Power Analysis 8 2013.11.04
PowerPlay Power Analysis 8 2013.11.04 QII53013 Subscribe Send Feedback The PowerPlay Power Analysis tools allow you to estimate device power consumption accurately. As designs grow larger and process technology continues to shrink, power becomes an increasingly important design consideration. When designing a PCB, you must estimate the power consumption of a device accurately to develop an appropriate power budget, and to design the power supplies, voltage regulators, heat sink, and cooling system. The following figure shows the PowerPlay Power Analysis tools ability to estimate power consumption from early design concept through design implementation. Figure 8-1: PowerPlay Power Analysis From Design Concept Through Design Implementation PowerPlay Early Power Estimator Quartus II PowerPlay Power Analyzer Higher Placement and Simulation Routing Results Results Accuracy Quartus II Design Profile User Input Estimation Design Concept Design Implementation Lower PowerPlay Power Analysis Input For the majority of the designs, the PowerPlay Power Analyzer and the PowerPlay EPE spreadsheet have the following accuracy after the power models are final: • PowerPlay Power Analyzer—±20% from silicon, assuming that the PowerPlay Power Analyzer uses the Value Change Dump File (.vcd) generated toggle rates. • PowerPlay EPE spreadsheet— ±20% from the PowerPlay Power Analyzer results using .vcd generated toggle rates. 90% of EPE designs (using .vcd generated toggle rates exported from PPPA) are within ±30% silicon. The toggle rates are derived using the PowerPlay Power Analyzer with a .vcd file generated from a gate level simulation representative of the system operation. © 2013 Altera Corporation. All rights reserved. ALTERA, ARRIA, CYCLONE, HARDCOPY, MAX, MEGACORE, NIOS, QUARTUS and STRATIX words and logos are trademarks of Altera Corporation and registered in the U.S. -
System-On-Chip Design with Arm® Cortex®-M Processors
System-on-Chip Design with Arm® Cortex®-M Processors Reference Book JOSEPH YIU System-on-Chip Design with Arm® Cortex®-M Processors System-on-Chip Design with Arm® Cortex®-M Processors Reference Book JOSEPH YIU Arm Education Media is an imprint of Arm Limited, 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge, CBI 9NJ, UK Copyright © 2019 Arm Limited (or its affiliates). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any other information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher, except under the following conditions: Permissions You may download this book in PDF format from the Arm.com website for personal, non- commercial use only. You may reprint or republish portions of the text for non-commercial, educational or research purposes but only if there is an attribution to Arm Education. This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein). Notices Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods and professional practices may become necessary. Readers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, project work, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods, they should be mindful of their safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the publisher and the authors, contributors, and editors shall not have any responsibility or liability for any losses, liabilities, claims, damages, costs or expenses resulting from or suffered in connection with the use of the information and materials set out in this textbook. -
Publication Title 1-1962
publication_title print_identifier online_identifier publisher_name date_monograph_published_print 1-1962 - AIEE General Principles Upon Which Temperature 978-1-5044-0149-4 IEEE 1962 Limits Are Based in the rating of Electric Equipment 1-1969 - IEEE General Priniciples for Temperature Limits in the 978-1-5044-0150-0 IEEE 1968 Rating of Electric Equipment 1-1986 - IEEE Standard General Principles for Temperature Limits in the Rating of Electric Equipment and for the 978-0-7381-2985-3 IEEE 1986 Evaluation of Electrical Insulation 1-2000 - IEEE Recommended Practice - General Principles for Temperature Limits in the Rating of Electrical Equipment and 978-0-7381-2717-0 IEEE 2001 for the Evaluation of Electrical Insulation 100-2000 - The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards 978-0-7381-2601-2 IEEE 2000 Terms, Seventh Edition 1000-1987 - An American National Standard IEEE Standard for 0-7381-4593-9 IEEE 1988 Mechanical Core Specifications for Microcomputers 1000-1987 - IEEE Standard for an 8-Bit Backplane Interface: 978-0-7381-2756-9 IEEE 1988 STEbus 1001-1988 - IEEE Guide for Interfacing Dispersed Storage and 0-7381-4134-8 IEEE 1989 Generation Facilities With Electric Utility Systems 1002-1987 - IEEE Standard Taxonomy for Software Engineering 0-7381-0399-3 IEEE 1987 Standards 1003.0-1995 - Guide to the POSIX(R) Open System 978-0-7381-3138-2 IEEE 1994 Environment (OSE) 1003.1, 2004 Edition - IEEE Standard for Information Technology - Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX(R)) - 978-0-7381-4040-7 IEEE 2004 Base Definitions 1003.1, 2013 -
Yikes! Why Is My Systemverilog Still So Slooooow?
DVCon-2019 San Jose, CA Voted Best Paper 1st Place World Class SystemVerilog & UVM Training Yikes! Why is My SystemVerilog Still So Slooooow? Cliff Cummings John Rose Adam Sherer Sunburst Design, Inc. Cadence Design Systems, Inc. Cadence Design System, Inc. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] www.sunburst-design.com www.cadence.com www.cadence.com ABSTRACT This paper describes a few notable SystemVerilog coding styles and their impact on simulation performance. Benchmarks were run using the three major SystemVerilog simulation tools and those benchmarks are reported in the paper. Some of the most important coding styles discussed in this paper include UVM string processing and SystemVerilog randomization constraints. Some coding styles showed little or no impact on performance for some tools while the same coding styles showed large simulation performance impact. This paper is an update to a paper originally presented by Adam Sherer and his co-authors at DVCon in 2012. The benchmarking described in this paper is only for coding styles and not for performance differences between vendor tools. DVCon 2019 Table of Contents I. Introduction 4 Benchmarking Different Coding Styles 4 II. UVM is Software 5 III. SystemVerilog Semantics Support Syntax Skills 10 IV. Memory and Garbage Collection – Neither are Free 12 V. It is Best to Leave Sleeping Processes to Lie 14 VI. UVM Best Practices 17 VII. Verification Best Practices 21 VIII. Acknowledgment 25 References 25 Author & Contact Information 25 Page 2 Yikes! Why is -
3. Verilog Hardware Description Language
3. VERILOG HARDWARE DESCRIPTION LANGUAGE The previous chapter describes how a designer may manually use ASM charts (to de- scribe behavior) and block diagrams (to describe structure) in top-down hardware de- sign. The previous chapter also describes how a designer may think hierarchically, where one module’s internal structure is defined in terms of the instantiation of other modules. This chapter explains how a designer can express all of these ideas in a spe- cial hardware description language known as Verilog. It also explains how Verilog can test whether the design meets certain specifications. 3.1 Simulation versus synthesis Although the techniques given in chapter 2 work wonderfully to design small machines by hand, for larger designs it is desirable to automate much of this process. To automate hardware design requires a Hardware Description Language (HDL), a different nota- tion than what we used in chapter 2 which is suitable for processing on a general- purpose computer. There are two major kinds of HDL processing that can occur: simu- lation and synthesis. Simulation is the interpretation of the HDL statements for the purpose of producing human readable output, such as a timing diagram, that predicts approximately how the hardware will behave before it is actually fabricated. As such, HDL simulation is quite similar to running a program in a conventional high-level language, such as Java Script, LISP or BASIC, that is interpreted. Simulation is useful to a designer because it allows detection of functional errors in a design without having to fabricate the actual hard- ware. When a designer catches an error with simulation, the error can be corrected with a few keystrokes. -
Version Control Friendly Project Management System for FPGA Designs
Copyright 2016 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers. This paper was published in Proceedings of SPIE (Proc. SPIE Vol. 10031, 1003146, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2247944 ) and is made available as an electronic reprint (preprint) with permission of SPIE. One print or electronic copy may be made for personal use only. Systematic or multiple reproduction, distribution to multiple locations via electronic or other means, duplication of any material in this paper for a fee or for com- mercial purposes, or modification of the content of the paper are prohibited. 1 Version control friendly project management system for FPGA designs Wojciech M. Zabołotnya aInstitute of Electronic Systems, Warsaw University of Technology, ul. Nowowiejska 15/19, 00-665 Warszawa, Poland ABSTRACT In complex FPGA designs, usage of version control system is a necessity. It is especially important in the case of designs developed by many developers or even by many teams. The standard development mode, however, offered by most FPGA vendors is the GUI based project mode. It is very convenient for a single developer, who can easily experiment with project settings, browse and modify the sources hierarchy, compile and test the design. Unfortunately, the project configuration is stored in files which are not suited for use with Version Control System (VCS). Another important problem in big FPGA designs is reuse of IP cores. Even though there are standard solutions like IEEE 1685-2014, they suffer from some limitations particularly significant for complex systems (e.g. only simple types are allowed for IP-core ports, it is not possible to use parametrized instances of IP-cores). -
A Syntax Rule Summary
A Syntax Rule Summary Below we present the syntax of PSL in Backus-Naur Form (BNF). A.1 Conventions The formal syntax described uses the following extended Backus-Naur Form (BNF). a. The initial character of each word in a nonterminal is capitalized. For ex- ample: PSL Statement A nonterminal is either a single word or multiple words separated by underscores. When a multiple word nonterminal containing underscores is referenced within the text (e.g., in a statement that describes the se- mantics of the corresponding syntax), the underscores are replaced with spaces. b. Boldface words are used to denote reserved keywords, operators, and punc- tuation marks as a required part of the syntax. For example: vunit ( ; c. The ::= operator separates the two parts of a BNF syntax definition. The syntax category appears to the left of this operator and the syntax de- scription appears to the right of the operator. For example, item (d) shows three options for a Vunit Type. d. A vertical bar separates alternative items (use one only) unless it appears in boldface, in which case it stands for itself. For example: From IEEE Std.1850-2005. Copyright 2005 IEEE. All rights reserved.* 176 Appendix A. Syntax Rule Summary Vunit Type ::= vunit | vprop | vmode e. Square brackets enclose optional items unless it appears in boldface, in which case it stands for itself. For example: Sequence Declaration ::= sequence Name [ ( Formal Parameter List ) ]DEFSYM Sequence ; indicates that ( Formal Parameter List ) is an optional syntax item for Sequence Declaration,whereas | Sequence [*[ Range ] ] indicates that (the outer) square brackets are part of the syntax, while Range is optional.