Case Studies

  • Bart Vermeulen
  • Kees Goossens
Part of the Embedded Systems book series (EMSY)


In this chapter we first evaluate the CSAR debug approach and infrastructure in Sect. 8.1. We subsequently use an illustrative GALS SOC model to evaluate specifically the communication-centric and abstraction-based aspects of the CSAR debug approach in more detail. We describe the application that runs on this SOC, its hardware architecture, and its internal clock domains in Sect. 8.2. We apply our DfD flow to the RTL implementation of this SOC in Sect. 8.3 and report on its effectiveness and efficiency. We also describe how we customize our CSARDE for use with this particular SOC. Even though this SOC is intentionally kept small for illustration purposes, we show in Sect. 8.4 that the factors identified in Chaps.  2 and  3 already complicate the debugging of an SOC this size. We also discuss in Sect. 8.4 how the CSAR debug approach and infrastructure reduces or eliminates the impact of each factor. In Sect. 8.5, we introduce examples of three different error types in the implementation of this SOC. These error types are (1) a permanent, certain error , (2) a transient, certain error , and (3) a transient, uncertain error . We subsequently describe how we can use the CSAR debug approach and infrastructure to localize these three example errors. We conclude this chapter with a summary in Sect. 8.6.


  1. 1.
    A.A. Abbo, R.P. Kleihorst, V. Choudhary, L. Sevat, P. Wielage, S. Mouy, B. Vermeulen, and M. Heijligers. Xetal-ii: A 107 gops, 600 mw massively parallel processor for video scene analysis. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 43(1):192–201, 1 2008.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tapani Ahonen, Timon D. ter Braak, Stephen T. Burgess, Richard Geissler, Paul M. Heysters, Heikki Hurskainen, Hans G. Kerkhoff, Andre B. J. Kokkeler, Jari Nurmi, Jussi Raasakka, Gerard K. Rauwerda, Gerard J.M. Smit, Kim Sunesen, Henk van Zonneveld, Bart Vermeulen, and Xiao Zhang. Crisp: Cutting edge reconfigurable ics for stream processing. In Joao M. P. Cardoso and Michael Hubner, editors, Reconfigurable Computing - From FPGAs to Hardware/Software Codesign, chapter 9, pages 211–238. Springer Science, 2011.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clifford E. Cummings. Simulation and synthesis techniques for asynchronous fifo design, 2002.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Danial. Cloc—count lines of code, 2012.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Santanu Dutta, Rune Jensen, and Alf Rieckmann. Viper: A Multiprocessor SOC for Advanced Set-Top Box and Digital TV Systems. IEEE Design and Test of Computers, 18(5):21–31, 2001.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Andreas Hansson. A Composable and Predictable On-Chip Interconnect. PhD thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, 2009.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andreas Hansson and Kees Goossens. An on-chip interconnect and protocol stack for multiple communication paradigms and programming models. In Proc. International Conference on Hardware/Software Codesign and System Synthesis, CODES+ISSS '09, pages 99–108, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    John Hennessy and David Patterson. Computer Architecture—A Quantitative Approach. Morgan Kaufmann, 2003.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    André Nieuwland, Jeffrey Kang, Om Prakash Gangwal, Ramanathan Sethuraman, Natalino Busá, Kees Goossens, Rafael Peset Llopis, and Paul Lippens. C-HEAP: A Heterogeneous Multi-processor Architecture Template and Scalable and Flexible Protocol for the Design of Embedded Signal Processing Systems. Design Automation for Embedded Systems, 7(3):233–270, 2002.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marino T. J. Strik, Adwin H. Timmer, Jef L. Van Meerbergen, and Gert jan Van Rootselaar. Heterogeneous multiprocessor for the management of real-time video and graphics streams. Solid-state circuits. In IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, volume 35, pages 1722–1731, 2000.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    T. D. ter Braak, S. T. Burgess, H. Hurskainen, H. G. Kerkhoff, B. Vermeulen, and X. Zhang. On-Line Dependability Enhancement of Multiprocessor SoCs by Resource Management. In Proc. International Symposium on Systems on Chip, pages 103–110. IEEE Circuits & Systems Society, 9 2010.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    G.J. Van Rootselaar and B. Vermeulen. Silicon debug: scan chains alone are not enough. In Proc. IEEE International Test Conference, pages 892–902, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bart Vermeulen. Functional Debug Techniques for Embedded Systems. IEEE Design and Test of Computers, 25(3):208–215, 2008.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. Vermeulen and G.J. van Rootselaar. Silicon debug of a co-processor array for video applications. In Proc. High-Level Design Validation and Test Workshop, pages 47–52, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bart Vermeulen and Hervé Vincent. DfD-Assisted System Test Analysis for Manufacturing Test Program Improvements. In Informal Proc. IEEE Workshop on Silicon Debug and Diagnosis, Ajaccio, Corsica, France, 5 2004.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bart Vermeulen and Sjaak Bakker. Debug architecture for the En-II system chip. IET Computers & Digital Techniques, 1(6):678–684, 11 2007.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    B. Vermeulen, S. Oostdijk, and F. Bouwman. Test and debug strategy of the pnx8525 nexperiaTM digital video platform system chip. In Proc. IEEE International Test Conference, pages 121–130, 2001.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Xiao Zhang, Hans G. Kerkhoff, and Bart Vermeulen. On-Chip Scan-Based Test Strategy for a Dependable Many-Core Processor Using a NoC as a Test Access Mechanism. In Proc. Euromicro Symposium on Digital System Design, pages 531–537, Los Alamitos, 9 2010. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NXP SemiconductorsEindhovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Faculty of Electrical EngineeringEindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations