Breaking News
Blog

IP integration: what standards do we need?

NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
DuologHarry
User Rank
Rookie
Standards for IP Integration
DuologHarry   7/23/2013 12:19:29 PM
There are some standards that are designed to make IP Integration esier, such as IP-XACT (IEEE-1685). It's hardly perfect (in fact is it undergoing some significant enhancements), but IP-XACT does enable the capture of all the register information, modes, interfaces, etc. to enable IP to be "packaged" for integration. Tool such as those from Duolog (full disclosure - I work there) can use IP-XACT data to integrate the IP automatically, e.g. construct the full chip memory map or stitch together subsystems and systems.

Some of the larger IP companies have embraced IP-XACT, but the smaller ones seem to lag behind. I think it's mostly a manpower issue for them, but it could be solved quite easily with some automated tools.

patrick.mannion
User Rank
Staff
Re: The Wrong Question?
patrick.mannion   7/1/2013 9:11:38 AM
NO RATINGS
It's a great question at the right time, Brian. So much more could be accomplished if progress was made here. I like what Synopsys is doing, but it's a point solution. Still, with so much innovation happening at the IP level and so many divergent needs. i have a hard time seeing any real standards evolving any time soon.

DrFPGA
User Rank
Blogger
The Wrong Question?
DrFPGA   6/29/2013 6:37:42 PM
NO RATINGS
Perhaps we are asking the wrong question.

Do you really want to test and verify the IP you add to your system? Is there a way to define/partition IP in such a way that it is 'correct by construction' when added to a system?

Maybe we can create IP using a standard interface, a standard protocol and 'higher level' operations that dramatically simplify the 'integration' process. Perhaps simplify it so much we don't really need to worry about 'integration' any more? Then we have a real solution...

Is this a possibility? Any work going on along these lines anywhere out there anywhere?

RichQ
User Rank
Staff
Test is important
RichQ   6/29/2013 3:15:29 PM
NO RATINGS
When you integrate IP into an SOC, one of the things you will need is test vectors for ensuring that the block you added is performing as expected. Happily, there is a standard now out that might help. It's the new JTAG IEEE 1149.1-2013. This is an extension of the boundary scan architecture defined for board test long ago, intended to simplify internal IC test. As I understand it, it allows IP developers to define JTAG testing for the boundary of their block, and have the test vectors they develop able to be dropped unchanged into a larger test program. This should simplify creating the necessary test patterns for SOCs.

Here's a tutorial you can download (it's at a commercial site) that helps explain the latest version of JTAG.

August Cartoon Caption Winner!
August Cartoon Caption Winner!
"All the King's horses and all the KIng's men gave up on Humpty, so they handed the problem off to Engineering."
5 comments
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.