walkeranderson Posted January 13, 2016 Report Share Posted January 13, 2016 What happens when a driver calls seq_item_port.put_response() with a response associated a request sequence item where the sequence that sent the request sequence item has terminated (and taken its response queue with it)? I'm not talking about a programming error condition where the sequence shouldn't have terminated. I'm talking about a real use case where the sequence did not want to wait for the response. And there would be other sequences working with this driver that did want to wait for and get their responses. It seems to be "handled" by the UVM code. Presumably the code under the hood for put_response sees that the response queue (or sequence) is no longer running and just does nothing. I'm wondering if this is intentional in the UVM implementation, and an expected usage model, or I'm just getting lucky and the current implementation happens to work for me. Thanks. Walker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastrick Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 I would expect that is an expected usage model and I have filed Mantis 5529 https://accellera.mantishub.com/view.php?id=5529 againstthe current IEEE standardization effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.