Overcoming post-silicon validation challenges through quick error detection (QED)
Abstract
Existing post-silicon validation techniques are generally ad hoc, and their cost and complexity are rising faster than design cost. Hence, systematic approaches to post-silicon validation are essential. Our research indicates that many of the bottlenecks of existing post-silicon validation approaches are direct consequences of very long error detection latencies. Error detection latency is the time elapsed between the activation of a bug during post-silicon validation and its detection or manifestation as a system failure. In our earlier papers, we created the Quick Error Detection (QED) technique to overcome this significant challenge. QED systematically creates a wide variety of post-silicon validation tests to detect bugs in processor cores and uncore components of multi-core System-on-Chips (SoCs) very quickly, i.e., with very short error detection latencies. In this paper, we present an overview of QED and summarize key results: 1. Error detection latencies of "typical" post-silicon validation tests can range up to billions of clock cycles. 2. QED shortens error detection latencies by up to 6 orders of magnitude. 3. QED enables 2- to 4-fold improvement in bug coverage. QED does not require any hardware modification. Hence, it is readily applicable to existing designs.
References
[1]
{Abramovici 90} Abramovici, M., M. A. Breuer, and A. D. Friedman, Digital Systems Testing and Testable Design, IEEE Press, 1990.
[2]
{Abramovici 06} Abramovici, M., "A Reconfigurable Design-for-Debug Infrastructure for SoCs," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., pp. 7--12, 2006.
[3]
{Adir 10} Adir, A., et al., "Reaching Coverage Closure in Post-Silicon Validation," Proc. of 6th Haifa Verification Conf., LNCS 6504, pp. 60--74. Springer-Verlag, 2010.
[4]
{Adir 11} Adir, A., et al., "A Unified Methodology for Pre-Silicon Verification and Post-silicon Validation," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conf., pp. 1--6, 2011.
[5]
{Aharon 95} Aharon, A., et al., "Test Program Generation for Functional Verification of PowerPC Processors in IBM," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., pp 279--285, 1995.
[6]
{Amyeen 09}, Amyeen, M. E., S. Venkataraman, and M. W. Mak, "Microprocessor System Failures Debug and Fault Isolation Methodology," Proc. IEEE Intl. Test Conf., pp. 1--10, 2009.
[7]
{Bardell 87} Bardell, P. H., W. H. McAnney, and J. Savir, Built-In Test for VLSI: Pseudorandom Techniques, Wiley, 1987.
[8]
{Basu 11} Basu, K., and P. Mishra, "Efficient Trace Signal Selection for Post-Silicon Validation and Debug," Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. on VLSI Design, pp. 352--357, 2011.
[9]
{Bayazit 05} Bayazit, A. A., and S. Malik, "Complementary Use of Runtime Validation and Model Checking," Proc. IEEE/ACM Intl. Conf. on Computer-aided Design, pp. 1049--1056, 2005.
[10]
{Bentley 01} Bentley, B., and R. Gray, "Validating the Intel Pentium 4 Processor." Intel Technology Journal, Vol. 5 Issue 1, pp. 1--8, February, 2001.
[11]
{Bohr 09} Bohr, M., "The New Era of Scaling in an SoC World," IEEE Solid-State Circuits Conf., pp 23--28, 2009.
[12]
{Bose 12} Bose, P., et al., "Power Management of Multi-Core Chips: Challenges and Pitfalls," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conf., pp. 977--982, 2012.
[13]
{Boule 07} Boule, M., J.-S. Chenard, and Z. Zilic, "Assertion Checkers in Verification, Silicon Debug and In-Field Diagnosis," Proc. IEEE Intl. Symp. on Quality Electronic Design, pp. 613--620, 2007.
[14]
{Chandy 83} Chandy, K. M., J. Misra, and L. M. Haas, "Distributed Deadlock Detection," ACM Trans. on Computer Systems, Vol. 1, Issue 2, pp. 144--156, May 1983.
[15]
{Conroy 05} Conroy, Z., G. Richmond, X. Gu, and B. Eklow, "A Practical Perspective on Reducing ASIC NTFs," Proc. IEEE Intl. Test Conf., pp. 1--7, 2005.
[16]
{Constantinides 08} Constantinides, K., O. Mutlu, and T. Austin, "Online Design Bug Detection: RTL Analysis, Flexible Mechanisms, and Evaluation," Proc. IEEE/ACM Intl. Symp. on Microarchitecture, pp. 282--293, 2008.
[17]
{DeOrio 08} DeOrio, A., A. Bauserman, and V. Bertacco, "Post-Silicon Verification for Cache Coherence," Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. on Computer Design, pp. 348--355, 2008.
[18]
{DeOrio 09} DeOrio, A., I. Wagner, and V. Bertacco, "DACOTA: Post-silicon Validation of the Memory Subsystem in Multi-Core Designs," Proc. IEEE Intl. Symp. on High-Performance Computer Architecture, pp. 405--416, 2009.
[19]
{Dongarra 03} Dongarra, J., P. Luszczek, and A. Petitet, "The LINPACK Benchmark: Past, Present and Future," Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience. Vol. 15, Issue 9, pp. 803--820, 2003.
[20]
{Eichelberger 77} Eichelberger, E. B., and T. W. Williams, "A Logic Design Structure for LSI Testability," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., pp. 462--468. 1977.
[21]
{Hamzaoglu 99} Hamzaoglu, I., and J. H. Patel, "Reducing Test Application Time for Full Scan Embedded Cores," Proc. Intl. Symp. Fault-Tolerant Computing, pp. 260--267, 1999.
[22]
{Ho 95} Ho, R. C., et al. "Architecture Validation for Processors," Proc. ACM/IEEE Intl. Symp. on Computer Architecture, pp. 404--413, 1995.
[23]
{Hong 10} Hong, T. et al., "QED: Quick Error Detection Tests for Effective Post-Silicon Validation," Proc. IEEE Intl. Test Conf., pp. 1--10, 2010.
[24]
{Jas 98} Jas, A., and N. A. Touba, "Test Vector Decompression via Cyclical Scan Chains and its Application to Testing Core-base Designs," Proc. IEEE Intl. Test Conf., pp. 458--464, 1998.
[25]
{Josephson 06} Josephson, D., "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Silicon Debug," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., pp. 3--6, 2006.
[26]
{Keshava 10} Keshava, J., N. Hakim, and C. Prudvi, "Post-silicon Validation Challenges: How EDA and Academia Can Help," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., pp. 3--7, 2010.
[27]
{Ko 08}, Ko, and H. F., Nicolici, "Automated Trace Signals Identification and State Restoration for Improving Observability in Post-Silicon Validation," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conf., pp. 1298--1303, 2008.
[28]
{Koenemann 91} Koenemann, B., "LFSR-Coded Test Patterns for Scan Designs," Proc. IEE European Test Conference, pp. 237--242, 1991
[29]
{Kubicki 07} Kubicki, K., "Understanding AMD's 'TLB' Processor Bug," Daily Tech, http://www.dailytech.com/Understanding++AMDs+TLB+Processor+Bug/article9915.htm, 2007.
[30]
{Lin 12} Lin, D., et al., "Quick Detection of Difficult Bugs for Effective Post-Silicon Validation," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., pp. 561--566, 2012.
[31]
{Liu 09} Liu, X., and Q. Xu, "Trace Signal Selection for Visibility Enhancement in Post-Silicon Validation," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conf., pp. 1338--1343, 2009.
[32]
{Lovellette 02} Lovellette, M. N. et al., "Strategies for Fault-tolerant Space-based Computing: Lessons Learned from the ARGOS Testbed," Proc. Aerospace Conf., pp. 5-2109--5-2119, 2002.
[33]
{Ma 95} Ma, S. C., P. Franco, and E. J. McCluskey, "An Experimental Chip to Evaluate Test Techniques Experiment Results," Proc. IEEE Intl. Test Conf., pp. 663--672, 1995.
[34]
{Martin 05} Martin, M., et al., "Multifacet's General Execution-Drive Multiprocessor Simulator (GEMS) Toolset," ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News, Vol. 33, Issue 4, pp. 92--99, November, 2005.
[35]
{Maxwell 93} Maxwell, P., and R. Aitken, "Test Sets and Reject Rates: All Fault Coverages are Not Created Equal," IEEE Design & Test of Computers, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 42--51, 1993.
[36]
{McCluskey 86} McCluskey, E. J., Logic Design Principles with Emphasis on Testable Semicustom Circuits, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.
[37]
{McCluskey 00} McCluskey, E. J. and C. W. Tseng, "Stuck-at Fault versus Actual Defects", Proc. IEEE Intl. Test Conf., pp. 336--343, 2000.
[38]
{McCluskey 04} McCluskey, E. J., et al., "ELF-Murphy Data on Defects and Tests Sets," Proc. IEEE VLSI Test Symposium, pp. 16--22, 2004.
[39]
{Miczo 86} Miczo, A., Digital Logic Testing and Simulation, Harper & Row, NY, NY, 1986.
[40]
{Mitra 04} Mitra, S., and K. S. Kim, "X-Compact: An Efficient Response Compaction Technique," IEEE Trans. on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, Vol. 23, Issue 3, pp. 421--432, 2004.
[41]
{Mitra 10} Mitra, S., S. A. Seshia, and N. Nicolici, "Post-Silicon Validation Opportunities, Challenges and Recent Advances," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., pp. 12--17, 2010.
[42]
{Nigh 97} Nigh, P., et al., "So What Is an Optimal Test Mix: A Discussion of the SEMATECH Methods Experiment," Proc. IEEE Intl. Test Conf., pp. 1037--1038, 1997.
[43]
{Oh 02a} Oh, N., P. P. Shirvani, and E. J. McCluskey, "Error Detection by Duplicated Instructions in Super-Scalar Processors," IEEE Trans. on Reliability, Vol. 51, Issue 1, pp. 63--75, 2002.
[44]
{Oh 02b} Oh, N., S. Mitra, and E. J. McCluskey, "ED4I: Error Detection by Diverse Data and Duplicated Instructions," IEEE Trans. on Computers, Vol. 51, Issue 2, pp. 180--199, 2002.
[45]
{Oh 02c} Oh, N., P. P. Shirvani, and E. J. McCluskey, "Control Flow Checking by Software Signatures," IEEE Trans. on Reliability, Vol. 51, Issue 1, pp. 111--122, 2002.
[46]
{OpenSPARC} "OpenSPARC: World's First Free 64-bit Microprocessor," http://www.opensparc.net.
[47]
{Patra 07} Patra, P., "On the Cusp of a Validation Wall," IEEE Design & Test of Computers, Vol. 24, Issue 2, pp. 193--196, March, 2007.
[48]
{Raina 98} Raina, R., and R. Molyneaux, "Random Self-Test Method Applications on PowerPC#8482; microprocessor cache," Proc. ACM/IEEE Great Lakes Symp. VLSI, pp. 222--229, 1998.
[49]
{Reick 12}, Reick, K., "Post-Silicon Debug," DAC Workshop on Post-Silicon Debug: Technologies, Methodologies, and Best-Practices. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., 2012.
[50]
{Shankland 05} Shankland, S., "Intel Pushes Back Itanium Chips, Revamps Xeon," CNET, http://news.cnet.com/Intel-pushes-back-Itanium-chips,-revamps-Xeon/2100-1006_3-5911316.html, 2005.
[51]
{Shimpi 11} Shimpi, A. L., "The Source of Intel's Cougar Point SATA Bug," AnandTech, http://www.anandtech.com/show/4143/the-source-of-intels-cougar-point-sata-bug, 2011.
[52]
{Singerman 11} Singerman, E., Y. Abarbanel, and S. Baartmans, "Transaction Based Pre-To-Post Silicon Validation," Proc. IEEE/ACM Design Automation Conf., pp. 564--568, 2011.
[53]
{Touba 01} Touba, N. A., and E. J. McCluskey, "Bit Fixing in Pseudorandom Sequences for Scan BIST," IEEE Trans. on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, pp. 545--555, 2001.
[54]
{Van Campenhout 00} Van Campenhout, D., et al., "Collection and Analysis of Microprocessor Design Errors," IEEE Design & Test of Computers, Vol. 17, Issue 4, pp. 51--60, Oct-Dec, 2000.
[55]
{Velev 03} Velev, M. N., "Collection of High-Level Microprocessor Bugs from Formal Verification of Pipelined and Superscalar Designs", Proc. IEEE Intl. Test Conf., pp. 138--147, September, 2003.
[56]
{Wagner 08} Wagner, I., and V. Bertaco, "Reversi: Post-Silicon Validation System for Modern Microprocessors," Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. on Computer Design, pp. 307--314, 2008.
[57]
{Williams 73} Williams, M. J. Y., and J. B. Angell, "Enhancing Testibility of Large Scale Integrated Circuits via Test Points and Additional Logic," IEEE Trans. on Computers, Vol. C-22, Issue 1, pp. 46--60, 1973.
[58]
{Woo 95} Woo, S. C., et al., "The SPLASH-2 Programs: Characterization and Methodological Considerations," Proc. ACM/IEEE Intl. Symp. on Computer Architecture, pp. 24--36, 1995
[59]
{Yerramilli 06} Yerramilli, S., "Addressing Post-Silicon Validation Challenges: Leverage Validation & Test Synergy (Invited Address)," IEEE Intl. Test Conf., 2006.
Index Terms
- Overcoming post-silicon validation challenges through quick error detection (QED)
Recommendations
Post-silicon validation opportunities, challenges and recent advances
DAC '10: Proceedings of the 47th Design Automation ConferencePost-silicon validation is used to detect and fix bugs in integrated circuits and systems after manufacture. Due to sheer design complexity, it is nearly impossible to detect and fix all bugs before manufacture. Post-silicon validation is a major ...
Quick detection of difficult bugs for effective post-silicon validation
DAC '12: Proceedings of the 49th Annual Design Automation ConferenceWe present a new technique for systematically creating postsilicon validation tests that quickly detect bugs in processor cores and uncore components (cache controllers, memory controllers, on-chip networks) of multi-core System on Chips (SoCs). Such ...
Quick error detection tests with fast runtimes for effective post-silicon validation and debug
DATE '15: Proceedings of the 2015 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & ExhibitionLong error detection latency, the time elapsed from the occurrence of an error caused by a bug to its manifestation as an observable failure, severely limits the effectiveness of existing post-silicon validation and debug techniques. Traditional post-...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Sponsors
- EDAA: European Design Automation Association
- ECSI
- EDAC: Electronic Design Automation Consortium
- SIGDA: ACM Special Interest Group on Design Automation
- IEEE CEDA
- The Russian Academy of Sciences: The Russian Academy of Sciences
Publisher
EDA Consortium
San Jose, CA, United States
Publication History
Published: 18 March 2013
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
DATE 13
Sponsor:
- EDAA
- EDAC
- SIGDA
- The Russian Academy of Sciences
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 518 of 1,794 submissions, 29%
Upcoming Conference
DATE '25
- Sponsor:
- sigda
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 170Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)5
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 19 Dec 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in