verilog interview question part2

 Why is it that "if (2'b01 & 2'b10)..." doesn't run the true case?

This is a popular coding error. You used the bit wise AND operator (&) where you meant to use the logical AND operator (&&).

What are Different types of Verilog Simulators ?

There are mainly two types of simulators available.
Event Driven
Cycle Based

Event-based Simulator:

This Digital Logic Simulation method sacrifices performance for rich functionality: every active signal is calculated for every device it propagates through during a clock cycle. Full Event-based simulators support 4-28 states; simulation of Behavioral HDL, RTL HDL, gate, and transistor representations; full timing calculations for all devices; and the full HDL standard. Event-based simulators are like a Swiss Army knife with many different features but none are particularly fast.

Cycle Based Simulator:

This is a Digital Logic Simulation method that eliminates unnecessary calculations to achieve huge performance gains in verifying Boolean logic:


1.) Results are only examined at the end of every clock cycle; and

2.) The digital logic is the only part of the design simulated (no timing calculations). By limiting the calculations, Cycle based Simulators can provide huge increases in performance over conventional Event-based simulators.

Cycle based simulators are more like a high speed electric carving knife in comparison because they focus on a subset of the biggest problem: logic verification.

Cycle based simulators are almost invariably used along with Static Timing verifier to compensate for the lost timing information coverage.

What is Constrained-Random Verification ?

As ASIC and system-on-chip (SoC) designs continue to increase in size and complexity, there is an equal or greater increase in the size of the verification effort required to achieve functional coverage goals. This has created a trend in RTL verification techniques to employ constrained-random verification, which shifts the emphasis from hand-authored tests to utilization of compute resources. With the corresponding emergence of faster, more complex bus standards to handle the massive volume of data traffic there has also been a renewed significance for verification IP to speed the time taken to develop advanced testbench environments that include randomization of bus traffic.

Directed-Test Methodology

Building a directed verification environment with a comprehensive set of directed tests is extremely time-consuming and difficult. Since directed tests only cover conditions that have been anticipated by the verification team, they do a poor job of covering corner cases. This can lead to costly re-spins or, worse still, missed market windows.

Traditionally verification IP works in a directed-test environment by acting on specific testbench commands such as read, write or burst to generate transactions for whichever protocol is being tested. This directed traffic is used to verify that an interface behaves as expected in response to valid transactions and error conditions. The drawback is that, in this directed methodology, the task of writing the command code and checking the responses across the full breadth of a protocol is an overwhelming task. The verification team frequently runs out of time before a mandated tape-out date, leading to poorly tested interfaces. However, the bigger issue is that directed tests only test for predicted behavior and it is typically the unforeseen that trips up design teams and leads to extremely costly bugs found in silicon.

Constrained-Random Verification Methodology

The advent of constrained-random verification gives verification engineers an effective method to achieve coverage goals faster and also help find corner-case problems. It shifts the emphasis from writing an enormous number of directed tests to writing a smaller set of constrained-random scenarios that let the compute resources do the work. Coverage goals are achieved not by the sheer weight of manual labor required to hand-write directed tests but by the number of processors that can be utilized to run random seeds. This significantly reduces the time required to achieve the coverage goals.

Scoreboards are used to verify that data has successfully reached its destination, while monitors snoop the interfaces to provide coverage information. New or revised constraints focus verification on the uncovered parts of the design under test. As verification progresses, the simulation tool identifies the best seeds, which are then retained as regression tests to create a set of scenarios, constraints, and seeds that provide high coverage of the design.

Difference between blocking and nonblocking assignments

While both blocking and nonblocking assignments are procedural assignments, they differ in behaviour with respect to simulation and logic

synthesis as follows:

How can I model a bi-directional net with assignments influencing both source and destination?

The assign statement constitutes a continuous assignment. The changes on the RHS of the statement immediately reflect on the LHS net. However, any changes on the LHS don't get reflected on the RHS. For example, in the following statement, changes to the rhs net will update the lhs net, but not vice versa.


System Verilog has introduced a keyword alias, which can be used only on nets to have a two-way assignment. For example, in the following code, any changes to the rhs is reflected to the lh s , and vice versa.
wire rhs , lhs
assign lhs=rhs;

System Verilog has introduced a keyword alias, which can be used only on nets to have a two-way assignment. For example, in the following code, any changes to the rhs is reflected to the lh s , and vice versa.

module test ();
wire rhs,lhs;

alias lhs=rhs;

In the above example, any change to either side of the net gets reflected on the other side.

Are tasks and functions re-entrant, and how are they different from static task and function calls?

In Verilog-95, tasks and functions were not re-entrant. From Verilog version 2001 onwards, the tasks and functions are reentrant. The reentrant tasks have a keyword automatic between the keyword task and the name of the task. The presence of the keyword automatic replicates and allocates the variables within a task dynamically for each task entry during concurrent task calls, i.e., the values don’t get overwritten for each task call. Without the keyword, the variables are allocated statically, which means these variables are shared across different task calls, and can hence get overwritten by each task call.





Read More ==>
Physical design part1
Physical design part2
Physical design part3
Placement

verilog interview question part1
verilog interview question part2
verilog interview question part3