Comments on: Checks or Functional Coverage (Part II)? http://www.verilab.com/blog/2007/07/checks-or-fcov-2/ Verilab Tue, 06 Jan 2009 03:59:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Sandeep Gor http://www.verilab.com/blog/2007/07/checks-or-fcov-2/#comment-151 Sandeep Gor Wed, 12 Dec 2007 06:08:42 +0000 http://www.verilab.com/blog/2007/07/checks-or-fcov-2/#comment-151 Hi David, I had a pleasur to work with you at Infineon's DVBH project. By the way, I fully agree with your comment that "checkers are more important than functional coverage". In fact, we need to have coverage points defined for checkers. Cadence have come up with a shareware to measure "check that" and "expect" statment and have them into coverage group. Specman 6.0 supports it. Once all checkers are developed, we should also have checker coverage grid along with functional coverage grid. Not only this, we should also make sure that each functional coverage point has relevent checker coverage point and each checker coverage point has relevent functional coverage point. This way, we make sure that all stimuli (functional coverage) has corrosponding output checker (checker coverage) in place. I have posted a small description about it on my blog http://digitalverification.blogspot.com/search/label/Coverage under heading (100% functional coverage is not enough). Best Regards, Sandeep Gor Hi David,
I had a pleasur to work with you at Infineon’s DVBH project.
By the way, I fully agree with your comment that “checkers are more important than functional coverage”. In fact, we need to have coverage points defined for checkers. Cadence have come up with a shareware to measure “check that” and “expect” statment and have them into coverage group. Specman 6.0 supports it.

Once all checkers are developed, we should also have checker coverage grid along with functional coverage grid. Not only this, we should also make sure that each functional coverage point has relevent checker coverage point and each checker coverage point has relevent functional coverage point. This way, we make sure that all stimuli (functional coverage) has corrosponding output checker (checker coverage) in place.

I have posted a small description about it on my blog http://digitalverification.blogspot.com/search/label/Coverage
under heading (100% functional coverage is not enough).

Best Regards,
Sandeep Gor

]]>