Abstract
Symbolic simulation is one of the most important equivalence checking method, but it can not deal with large designs due to the limited capacity of BDD and SAT/SMT. Cut-points technique is used with symbolic simulation to verify the large size of designs. However, the existing approaches need the mapping information, which is not easily obtained in the verification process. This paper presents a new equivalence checking method against system-level descriptions without mapping information of variables. Our method first randomly simulate the designs under verification to generate potential cut-points set. If some output variables do not belong to the potential cut-points set, return not equivalent. Second, our method select and remove the potential cut-point pair from the set and slice the program according to it. Third, we symbolically simulate the slice and compare the results. If the corresponding potential cut-points are really equivalent, they are put into equivalent set. Finally, the process is repeated until the potential cut-points set is empty or some outputs are not equivalent. Our method can check the equivalence of designs without mapping information and decrease the verification size. The experimental results shows the effectiveness and efficiency of our proposed method.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bombieri N, Fummi F, Pravadelli G (2008) RTL-TLM equivalence checking based on simulation. In: Proceedings of design and test symposium (EWDTS), pp 214–217
Hu J, Li T, Li S (2015) Equivalence checking between SLM and TLM using coverage directed simulation. Front Comput Sci (FCS) 9(6):934–943
Gro\(\upbeta \)e D, Gro\(\upbeta \) M, Khne U, Drechsler R (2011) Simulation-based equivalence checking between System C models at different levels of abstraction. In: Great lakes symposium on VLSI, pp 223–228
Shankar S, Fujita M (2008) Rule-based approaches for equivalence checking of SpecC programs. In: ACM/IEEE international conference on formal methods and models for codesign, pp 39–48
Nishihara T, Ando D, Matsumoto T, Fujita M (2007) ExSDG: unified dependence graph representation of hardware design from system level down to RTL for formal analysis and verification. In: Proceedings international workshop of logic and synthesis, pp 83–90
Matsumoto T, Nishihara T, Kojima Y, Fujita M (2009) Equivalence checking of high-level designs based on symbolic simulation. In: International conference on communications, circuits and systems, pp 1129–1133
Weiser M (1982) Programmers use slices when debugging. Commun ACM 25(7):446–452
Tip F (1994) A survey of program slicing techniques, CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science)
Horwitz S, Reps T, Binkley D (1990) Interprocedural slicing using dependence graphs. ACM Trans Programm Lang Syst 12(1):26–60
Cytron R, Ferrante J, Rosen BK, Wegman MN, Kenneth Zadeck F (1991) Efficiently computing static single assignment form and the control dependence graph. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 13(4):451–490
de Moura L, Bjorner N (2008) Z3: an efficient SMT solver, international conference on Tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis of systems, pp 337–340
Gupta S, Dutt N, Gupta R, Nicolau A (2003) Spark: a high-level synthesis framework for applying parallelizing compiler transformations. In: International conference on VLSI design, pp 461–466
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61902421).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hu, J., Wang, G., Chen, G., Kang, Y., Wang, L., Ouyang, J. (2020). Equivalence Checking Between System-Level Descriptions by Identifying Potential Cut-Points. In: Liang, Q., Wang, W., Liu, X., Na, Z., Jia, M., Zhang, B. (eds) Communications, Signal Processing, and Systems. CSPS 2019. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 571. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9409-6_159
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9409-6_159
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-9408-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-9409-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)