Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'randomization'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Accellera Systems Initiative
    • Information
    • Announcements
    • In the News
  • SystemC
    • SystemC Language
    • SystemC AMS (Analog/Mixed-Signal)
    • SystemC TLM (Transaction-level Modeling)
    • SystemC Verification (UVM-SystemC, SCV)
    • SystemC CCI (Configuration, Control & Inspection)
    • SystemC Datatypes
  • UVM (Universal Verification Methodology)
    • UVM (IEEE 1800.2) - Methodology and BCL Forum
    • UVM SystemVerilog Discussions
    • UVM Simulator Specific Issues
    • UVM Commercial Announcements
    • UVM (Pre-IEEE) Methodology and BCL Forum
  • Portable Stimulus
    • Portable Stimulus Discussion
    • Portable Stimulus 2.0 Public Review Feedback
  • IP Security
    • IP Security Assurance Whitepaper Discussion
  • IP-XACT
    • IP-XACT Discussion
  • IEEE 1735/IP Encryption
    • IEEE 1735/IP Encryption Discussion
  • Commercial Announcements
    • Announcements

Categories

  • SystemC
  • UVM
  • UCIS
  • IEEE 1735/IP Encryption

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Biography


Location


Interests


Occupation


Company

Found 4 results

  1. Hi All, I have a typical use case, where the sequence item w.r.t driver is always the same, but it's view needs to change while writing constraints. The fields of sequence items to write constraints change w.r.t the header type, there are around 25-30 types of headers. What is the best way to create the base sequence item in this case in line with UVM methodology? Example:- bit [32] header; //Actual header as seen by driver The format of the header is however dynamic:- format-1 : bit[31:21] header_type; bit[20:10] field_2_type_1; bit[9:0] fie
  2. Hi All, Just wanted to check if the UVM sequence macros (UVM_DO_ON_WITH and UVM_DO_WITH) which support randomizing the sequence object are yet supported by UVM-SC or not? If not, what is the best way to add some randomization in the framework? I saw a post where there are some snippets (link given below) using scvx_rand_object class but I am not sure where to find this(didn't find it in latest SCV and UVM-SC libraries). http://nascug.org/events/20th/1-NASCUG20-UVMforSystemC-Karsten.pdf Also, I get errors while using plain UVM_DO_ON macros. Is it expected? The same works fine wi
  3. Hi All, I am seeing following error when I try to assign array values using inline constraints Array size's and dimensions are same and array slicing is not there ,but still I see below error. Can somebody please through light on this error? Also suggest best practices class A_seq extends uvm_sequence #(id_nfc_tx_transfer); `uvm_object_utils(A_seq) `uvm_declare_p_sequencer(tx_sequencer) bit [7:0] data_byte[`MAX_DATA:0] ; function new(string name="A_seq"); super.new(name); endfunction virtual task body(); ///Array Initialization for (int i=0;i<
  4. I was just reading the 1800-2012 standard and I've come across something that strikes me as a possible contradiction. In section 18.8 Disabling random variables with rand_mode() it states that Later on, when an example is presented, I see the following code snipped: The comment states that packet_a.rand_mode(0) disables randomization for all variables inside the object, which is against the statement from above. Could anyone who's part of the SV committee shed some light on the issue?
×
×
  • Create New...