I (we) have been using (for years) tools like you describe to identify
"reset" issues but they are not full proof. Plus it is nice to have
more than one method to verify something. Nothing like a backup.
That's interesting. Is it because of too much warnings that these tools throw up? Anyway as you said, "a backup is always good" so I would put Lint as a backup option as well :-)
Posted By bryan on 3/18/2007 8:19 AM
Good Idea about the using the assertion. We're not using imbedded SVA assertions (simulation control reasons)
If you care to, can you elaborate on the "sim control reasons"? As you maybe aware, I've co-authored 2 books on Assertions and have seen few ways to handle this:
1. Ifdef - compile time control
2. $test$plusargs - run time, perf issue
3. Using TCL - becomes tool dependent somewhat and having TCL enabled in itself is a perf killer
4. $assertoff/on - run time control, LRM compliant - again not so great on perf though.
But what is more interesting to me is you are saying:
but I am sure I can construct something similar using OVL.
Do you really expect to see a big perf difference among OVL vs. SVA/PSL? Has anyone done such a comparison? I would imagine that tools like NC who have been supporting assertions for close to 4+ years must have optimized their engines and hence you won't see much difference. Or was your concern more on just the language (and perhaps license) than performance?
Originally posted in cdnusers.org by ajeetha