Home > Community > Blogs > Functional Verification > dvcon 09 saas panel thoughts part 1
Login with a Cadence account.
Not a member yet?
Create a permanent login account to make interactions with Cadence more conveniennt.

Register | Membership benefits
Get email delivery of the Functional Verification blog (individual posts).


* Required Fields

Recipients email * (separate multiple addresses with commas)

Your name *

Your email *

Message *

Contact Us

* Required Fields
First Name *

Last Name *

Email *

Company / Institution *

Comments: *

DVCon '09 SaaS Panel Thoughts, Part 1

Comments(1)Filed under: Functional Verification, CDV, Coverage-Driven Verification, metric driven verification (MDV), coverage driven verification (CDV), DVcon, SaaS, Harry The ASIC Guy

[Preface / Disclaimer: I haven't yet had the pleasure of working closely with Cadence's own Hosted Design Solutions team, so the following will likely reveal ignorance of strategies and solutions that they already have in place to address the issues outlined below.  However, given the ideas this panel has inspired, you can be sure I'll be closing this personal information gap in the very near future ...]

A surprise, last minute addition to the DVCon 2009 program was a panel on Software As A Service ("SaaS") as it applies to EDA.  (The last 4 frames of the set pointed to by this link are photos of this event.)  Organized and moderated by Harry "The ASIC Guy" Gries, the panelists were all SaaS veterans who shared their experiences in a series of opening remarks, and who were very patient in fielding Q&A from the largely novice audience.  Over the course of the event, the following issues, some of which are unique to EDA, bubbled to the surface:

* Security

* Classes of applications that clearly benefit from SaaS

* Bandwidth needs

* Configuration control

* Dealing with and/or migrating legacy flows & data

Before commenting on each of these in turn, allow me to cut to the chase with the following unscientific, gut feelings that:

* None of the above issues will block significant adoption of SaaS by the EDA industry, within the panelists' general consensus time frame of ~5 years.

* EDA applications that easily leverage multiple CPUs (metric driven verification, anyone?) will surely be in the vanguard of this movement, but this is not to say that all other EDA tools won't eventually migrate to the cloud too.

* In many ways, it's not terribly important to me what platform my products run on, as long as someone wants to run them!  ;-)  Seriously, whether it's a local farm of Linux boxes, Suns, AIX machines, or some remote, virtualized cloud of processing power, it's the applications themselves (and methodologies that help users extract the most value from said applications) that's most important to the end user.

In future posts, I'll step back and address each of the SaaS concerns listed above in the context of EDA in general, and verification in specific.



By Jeremy Ralph on March 12, 2009
Thanks for the update on the SaaS and Cloud event.  It's great to hear different people's perspectives.  At http://SpectaReg.com we have had chip-dev customers using SaaS in production for several quarters now.  The results so far have been very positive.  There are of course some companies that are uncomfortable with this model... so for them they can host the server application onsite, behind their corporate firewall for complete control and customization.    

Leave a Comment

E-mail (will not be published)
 I have read and agree to the Terms of use and Community Guidelines.
Community Guidelines
The Cadence Design Communities support Cadence users and technologists interacting to exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices to solve problems and get the most from Cadence technology. The community is open to everyone, and to provide the most value, we require participants to follow our Community Guidelines that facilitate a quality exchange of ideas and information. By accessing, contributing, using or downloading any materials from the site, you agree to be bound by the full Community Guidelines.