Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'run_phase'.

  • 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 2017 - Methodology and BCL Forum
    • UVM SystemVerilog Discussions
    • UVM Simulator Specific Issues
    • UVM Commercial Announcements
    • UVM (Pre-IEEE) Methodology and BCL Forum
    • UVM 1.2 Public Review
  • Portable Stimulus
    • Portable Stimulus 1.0
    • Portable Stimulus Pre-Release Discussion
  • 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

Calendars

  • Community Calendar

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 5 results

  1. Hi all, I have a couple of counters in my monitor's run_phase which I'm trying to print in the report_phase. But, the test itself is being killed (I cannot edit the file which is killing the test) which my monitor is still in the run_phase & hence the counters aren't being printed. Is there any way to enforce the report_phase to be run/ any way to call the report_phase from within the monitor file ?
  2. The cook book from Mentor tells following and in another thread, the moderator also suggested against using the sub phases of run. However in one of my projects, I do find the need for using them (and infact we had an internal implemention of something similar in our previous OVM version). Are there any thing happening on this front? Is there a risk in using the sub phases if some of that changes in a future version? "The Accellera UVM committee is still developing the use models and APIs for new UVM phasing as it relates to sequences and transactors. In the mean time, our recommendation
  3. Hello there, As per Mentor's UVM guidelines 5.2 [1], reset_phase() will be obsolete in future releases. During DVCon 2014, Cadence recommends to use run_phases() on slide 5 of [2]. With the release of UVM-1.2, I believed that the sub-phases of run_phase are now stable and clean. Now with the recommendations above, it seems that the it's better to stick with run_phase() itself. As UVM delelopers, what are your views about it ? What do you recommend ? My intention is not to start a flame war of any kind. But to understand which route to opt in order that most of my UVM code
  4. I am trying to run a couple of test cases using script.But I am getting an error message after running the first test case.This stops the simulation.I am attaching the LOG with this mail.I don't understand why this is happening. I checked previous posts and added +UVM_OBJECTION_TRACE in the vsim command.But I am not able to find out the cause of the error.Can anybody help me?? # UVM_INFO @ 0: run [OBJTN_TRC] Object uvm_test_top raised 1 objection(s): count=1 total=1 # UVM_INFO @ 0: run [OBJTN_TRC] Object uvm_top added 1 objection(s) to its total (raised from source object uvm_test_top)
  5. Q1) Is there truth to the hearsay that the Technical Committee (UVM Working Group) will/might remove run_phase's twelve sub phases (pre_reset, reset, etc.)? If so, when might we expect it? Q2) When is UVM 1.2 expected? Q3) I am just looking into precompiling the uvm base class for our testbenches. (I suppose that I would need two versions, one with -linedebug and one w/o.) Does anyone have any comments about pre-compiling the UVM base class as I now work thru an example?
×
×
  • Create New...