Activity

The functions that are used to perform interface transactions and directive transactions are quite flexible and numerous. They include blocking and non-blocking calls aka asynchronous. These applies to the manager and subordinate, both read and write and also check functions.

Why is there need to have both blocking and non-blocking function…[Read more]

The MIT document for streaming and address mapped interfaces states this: “One of the challenges of using a single record, such as AddressBusRecType, as an interface is dealing with multiple drivers on each record element. OSVVM does this giving each element a resolved type, such as bit_max, std_logic_vector_max_c, integer_max, time_max, and…[Read more]

Any word from your Siemens contact on this? I’ve reached out to my Siemens FAE as well. By chance does the new release of OSVVM (2024.05) include visualizer support at all?

Thanks in advance,
-Jake

The scoreboards can contain tags for “out of order” transactions and can also drop transactions. This makes them more sophisticated then mere FIFOs. But what more features could they be given when you say “There is a long term plan to give users more direct control of the output of scoreboards.”

Okay, that was helpful and after comparing the logs I’m reasonably confident that I am supplying the needed switches to the SetExtendedSimulateOptions.

At this point the remaining failure when using RunTest seems to be in the load libraries steps, specifically the libraries from Aldec. In the below console output, systf.dll and…[Read more]

The DelayCoverage models divide a transfer into segments that are BurstLength in length. For beats (transfers within that burst length) there is BeatDelay between each item transferred on the interface. After BurstLength there is BurstDelay before the next item is transferred. Each of BurstLength, BeatDelay, and BurstLength is randomized using…[Read more]

This code confused me and is found in the AXI4 manager source:

— Initialize DelayCoverage Models
AddBins (WriteAddressDelayCov.BurstLengthCov, GenBin(2,10,1)) ;
AddBins (WriteAddressDelayCov.BeatDelayCov, GenBin(0)) ;
AddBins (WriteAddressDelayCov.BurstDelayCov, GenBin(2,5,1)) ;

…

— Valid Delay between…[Read more]

That means normally we would not need to use Alert, but only the Affirm functions?

By the way, I did attend your course on OSVVM many years ago, before COVID. I was quite unwell in that week when I attended and could not absord the finer points. I had one more colleague with me. That colleague left a few wekks later and a redundancy drive a few…[Read more]

> Q2. Why does one need “Alert” functions when “Affirm” functions also exists?
Alert is for parameter checks – like is max >= min. These are properties that if violated, the design (or test case) is broken.

Affirm is for self checking. Each check is counted. A test quality is a function of the number of checks and we report that.

>…[Read more]

What you find in the documentation is what is what is officially supported.

The scoreboard package was released to our classes in 2006. The AlertLog capability was added in 2015. So there is some history there. Certainly doing

Get(TRec, Data) ;
expectedData := pop(SbID) ;
AffirmIfEqual(TbID, Data, expectedData) ;

Is very similar…[Read more]

The Axi4Manager has a TransactionDispatcher, which receives transactions from the Test Sequencer (TestCtrl) and dispatches these out to interface handlers (such as WriteAddressHandler). The interface handlers connect to the DUT and represent independently running pieces of the VC. The communication between the TransactionDispatcher and…[Read more]

I understand that all of these are basically FIFOs. The term “scoreboard” need not confuse oneself.

The AXI4Manager source code contains these lines in the architecture declaration part:

signal WriteAddressFifo : osvvm.ScoreboardPkg_slv.ScoreboardIDType ;
signal WriteDataFifo : osvvm.ScoreboardPkg_slv.ScoreboardIDType ;

signal ReadAddressFifo : osvvm.ScoreboardPkg_slv.ScoreboardIDType ;
signal…[Read more]

It seems that so many IDs are needed to create a hierarchical output for difference aspects of the BFM in the test result report.

Hi Brad,
Short answer: yes you must run either simulate or RunTest to get the coverage reports

Behind the scenes when simulate finishes it saves the code coverage data base. When a test suite finishes, the code coverage from each test case is merged together. When the build finishes, it merges together the coverage from each test suite and…[Read more]

Hey, I appreciate the insight and I actually worked my way to this action after noticing that the simulate command called vsim. I guess one more question to make sure I’m understanding these scripts correctly.

Currently, I know the following script will allow my to run my test and see the results:

SetCoverageSimulateEnable true

analyze…[Read more]