Scheduling of Transactions Based on Extended Scheduling Timed Petri Nets for SoC System-Level Test-Case Generation

  • JinShan Yu
  • Tun Li
  • Yang Guo
  • QingPing Tan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4096)


The effective scheduling of transactions has a great potential for SoC functional verification. Petri nets have proven to be a promising technique for solving scheduling problem. This paper aims at presenting a Petri-net based approach to the scheduling of transactions generated by a test-case generator. Firstly, an extended scheduling timed Petri nets (ESTPN) model is given to support transaction scheduling. Secondly, the short term of ‘scheduling of transactions problem’ is formulated by means of an ESTPN which can accommodate various scheduling policies. Finally, transactions scheduling schemes and scheduling algorithm based on ESTPN are given and cases are studied.


Schedule Problem Schedule Algorithm Schedule Scheme Mixed Integer Linear Programming Test Schedule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cadence Berkeley Labs: The Transaction-Based Verification Methodology. Technical Report # CDNL-TR-2000-0825 (August 2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Jindal, R., Jain, K.: Verification of Transaction-Level SystemC models using RTL Testbenches. In: Proceedings of the First ACM and IEEE International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Co-Design, pp. 199–204 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Emek, R., Naveh, Y.: Scheduling of Transactions for System-Level Test-Case Generation. In: Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE International High-Level Design Validation and Test Workshop, pp. 149–154 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Emek, R., Jaeger, I., Naveh, Y., Bergman, G., Aloni, G., Katz, Y., Farkash, M., Dozoretz, I., Goldin, A.: X-Gen: A Random Test-Case Generator for Systems and SoCs. In: Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International High-Level Design Validation and Test Workshop, pp. 145–150 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Iyengar, V., Chakrabarty, K., Marinissen, E.J.: Recent Advances in Test Planning for Modular Testing of Core-Based SOCs. In: Proceedings of the 11th Asian Test Symp., pp. 320–325 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chou, R., Saluja, K., Agrawal, V.: Scheduling Tests for VLSI Systems under Power Constraints. IEEE Trans. VLSI 5(2), 175–185 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosinger, P., Al-Hashimi, B., Nicolici, N.: Power Profile Manipulation: A New Approach for Reducing Test Application Time under Power Constraints. IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 21(10), 1217–1225 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhao, D., Upadhyaya, S.: Adaptive Test Scheduling in SoC’s by Dynamic Partitioning. In: Proceedings of the 17th IEEE Int’l. Symp. Defect and Fault Tolerance in VLSI Systems, pp. 334–342 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhao, D., Upadhyaya, S.: Power Constrained Test Scheduling with Dynamically Varied TAM. In: Proceedings of the 21st VLSI Test Symp., pp. 273–278 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Coffman Jr., E.G., Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S., Tarjan, R.E.: Performance Bounds for Level-Oriented Two-Dimensional Packing Algorithm. SIAM J. Computing 9, 809–826 (1980)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huang, Y., Cheng, W.-T., Tsai, C.-C., Mukherjee, N., Samman, O., Zaidan, Y., Reddy, S.M.: Resource Allocation and Test Scheduling for Concurrent Test of Core-Based SoC Design. In: Proceedings of IEEE Asian Test Symposium (ATS), pp. 265–270 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Huang, Y., Cheng, W.-T., Tsai, C.-C., Mukherjee, N., Samman, O., Zaidan, Y., Reddy, S.M.: On Concurrent Test of Core-Based SoC Design. J. Electronic Testing: Theory and Applications 18, 401–414 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Iyengar, V., Chakrabarty, K., Marinissen, E.J.: Wrapper/TAM Co-Optimization, Constraint-Driven Test Scheduling, and Tester Data Volume Reduction for SOCs. In: Proc. 39th Design Automation Conf., pp. 685–690 (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Huang, Y., Reddy, S.M., Cheng, W.-T., Reuter, P., Mukherjee, N., Tsai, C.-C., Samman, O., Zaidan, Y.: Optimal Core Wrapper Width Selection and SOC Test Scheduling Based on 3D Bin Packing Algorithm. In: Proceedings of ITC 2002, pp. 74–82 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huang, Y., Cheng, W.-T., Tsai, C.-C., Mukherjee, N., Reddy, S.M.: Static Pin Mapping and SOC Test Scheduling for Cores with Multiple Test Sets. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Quality Electronic Design, pp. 99–104 (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nourani, M., Papachristou, C.: An ILP Formulation to Optimize Test Access Mechanism in SoC Testing. In: Proceedings of ITC 2000, pp. 902–910 (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chakrabarty, K.: Test Scheduling for Core-Based Systems Using Mixed Integer Linear Programming. IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design 19, 1163–1174 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Iyengar, V., Chakrabarty, K.: Precedence-Based, Preemptive, and Power-Constrained Test Scheduling for System-on-a-Chip. In: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE VLSI Test Symposium, pp. 368–374 (2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nourani, M., Chin, J.: Power-Time Trade-Off in Test Scheduling for SoCs. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Design (ICCD 2003), pp. 548–553 (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chin, J., Nourani, M.: FITS: An Integrated ILP-Based Test Scheduling Environment. IEEE Trans. on computer 54(12), 1598–1613 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Petri net based scheduling. Computing Science Reports 95/23, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven (1995)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tsai, J.J.P., Yang, S.J., Chang, Y.-H.: Timing Constraints Petri Net and Their Application to Schedulability Analysis for Real-Time System Specification. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering 21(1) (1995)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Huifang, L., Yushun, F.: Schedulability analysis method for Timing Constraint Petri Nets. Tsinghua Science and Technology 7(6), 596–601 (2002)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Roux, O.H., Deplanche, A.M.: A t-time Petri net extension for real time-task scheduling modeling. European Journal of Automation (JESA) 36, 973–987 (2002)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lime, D., Gardey, G., Magnin, M., Roux, O(H.): Romeo: A Tool for Analyzing Time Petri Nets. In: Etessami, K., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) CAV 2005. LNCS, vol. 3576, pp. 418–423. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Berthomieu, B., Ribet, P.-O., Vernadat, F.: The tool TINA: Construction of abstract state. spaces for Petri nets and time Petri nets. International Journal of Production Research 42(14) (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • JinShan Yu
    • 1
  • Tun Li
    • 1
  • Yang Guo
    • 1
  • QingPing Tan
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceNational University of Defense TechnologyChangshaP.R. China

Personalised recommendations