datasheets.com EBN.com EDN.com EETimes.com Embedded.com PlanetAnalog.com TechOnline.com  
Events
UBM Tech
UBM Tech

Design Article

Bridging software and hardware to accelerate SoC validation

Brad Quinton, Tektronix

2/15/2012 12:43 PM EST

As the complexity of systems-on-chip (SoCs) continues to increase, it is no longer possible to ignore the challenges caused by the convergence of software and hardware development. These highly functional systems now include a complex mix of software, firmware, embedded processors, GPUs, memory controllers, and other high-speed peripherals. This increased functional integration, combined with faster internal clock speeds and complex, high-speed I/O, means that delivering a functional and fully validated system is harder than ever.

Traditionally, software validation and debug and hardware validation and debug have been separate worlds. Often, software and hardware teams work in isolation, with the former concentrating on software execution within the context of the programming model, and the latter debugging within the hardware development framework, where clock-cycle accuracy, parallel operation and the relationship of debug data back to the original design is key. In theory, fully debugged software and hardware should work flawlessly together. But in the real world that is rarely the case, a fact that often leads to critical cost increases and time-to-market delays. 

To deliver increased integration within a reasonable cost and time, the industry must transition to a new approach – design for visibility. Said another way, engineers must design, upfront, the ability to deliver a full system view if we are going to be able to continue to validate and debug these systems effectively.  The key is to be able to understand causal relationships between behaviors that span hardware and software domains. This article describes an approach to debugging an SoC using embedded instruments, and shows how the integration of hardware and software debug views can lead to faster and more efficient debug of the entire system.

Building the Test Bed
The test bed SoC shown in Figure 1 is composed of a 32-bit RISC instruction set processor, connected to an AMBA AHB system bus, and AMBA APB peripheral bus. The SoC also contains a DDR2 memory controller, a gigabit Ethernet network adapter, a Compact Flash controller, VGA controller and number of low-speed peripheral interfaces. The SoC runs Debian GNU Linux operating system version 4 running kernel v2.6.21. The processor core operates at 60MHz, the DDR memory controller at 100MHz, and the other I/O peripherals operate at their native frequencies between 33MHz and 12MHz. The entire SoC is implemented on a Virtex-5 development board.  


Figure 1: Baseline test bed SoC (Click figure to download PDF)
Together, this system is a fully-functional computer able to provide terminal-based user access, connect to the Internet, run applications, mount file systems, etc. The SoC is characteristic of those that create complex debug scenarios, and stress the capabilities of both hardware and software debug infrastructures. In most cases, key operations span hardware and software.

Debug Infrastructures
Processor core developers generally provide debug infrastructures, either as a fixed set of features for a given core or as a configurable add-on to a family of cores. In either case, the debug infrastructure becomes a part of the manufactured core. Debug software then uses this infrastructure to provide debug features to software developers.

The processor core highlighted here supports a basic set of debug capabilities similar to those available on most modern processors, including those from Intel, AMD, IBM, Oracle and ARM. In this case, a “back-door” accessible via JTAG allows a software debugger, for example GDB, to read and write memory in the system and detect the operational state of the processor. Through these mechanisms, along with access to the original software source code, GDB and other software debuggers can provide software breakpoints, single-step operation, examination of variable values, stack tracing, configuration of initial conditions, alternation of memory values and resume functionality.

In most cases, hardware debug infrastructures are not delivered with the hardware IP cores that make-up a SoC. Instead the hardware debug infrastructure is often overlaid onto an existing SoC design. There are a number of reasons for this difference. First, unlike software debug, the underlying functionality required of hardware debug is diverse and often not completely understood until the SoC is assembled. In addition, each new SoC often requires a different debug infrastructure. Finally, as an emerging area, there is less standardization and less of an ecosystem around hardware debug. The development of a hardware debug infrastructure thus is often left to individual designers who create ad-hoc debug features targeting different functional areas. In larger organizations, internally supported tools and architectures are often developed. However, as the complexity of SoCs continues to rise, so does the complexity of creating an efficient hardware debug infrastructure, and internal development efforts are difficult to sustain.

As an alternative, test and measurement vendors can provide complete design tools, IP library, and work flow to create a hardware debug infrastructure. The set up shown in Figure 2, called the Tektronix Clarus Post-Silicon Validation Suite, is composed of re-configurable embedded instruments that can be connected together and distributed throughout the SoC to create a debug infrastructure specific to the functional requirements. The Implementer tool allows the instrumentation of any signal, at any level of hierarchy, at the RTL-level (Verilog, System Verilog, and VHDL) in the hardware design. The Analyzer configures and controls the embedded instruments via JTAG or an Ethernet connection. Lastly, the Investigator maps the data collected by the embedded instruments back to the original RTL (in a simulation environment) to enable more complex debug.


Figure 2: Architecture of the Clarus Post-Silicon Validation Suite

The embedded instruments are applied to an SOC to provide a debug infrastructure as shown in Figure 3. An important aspect is the ability to reconfigure the instrument to target various signals and scenarios in different areas of the SoC while debug is in progress. The base instruments are called capture stations, which independently manage the selection, compression, processing and storage of observed data. Multiple stations are often used together to create a design-specific infrastructure for a given SoC. During insertion, the capture stations are configured with a list of potential signals of interest, a maximum number of simultaneous observations, and maximum RAM size. Capture stations are generally assigned to specific clock domains, and capture synchronously to observed data. The analyzer collects the data from each station, reverses the compression algorithms, and aligns the data captured in each station to produce a time-correlated view across all capture stations.


Figure 3: Hardware debug infrastructure (click photo to download PDF)

The SoC used in this example has four capture stations: one in the processor clock domain, labeled Capture Station #1 (60MHz) targeting 362 signals; one in the RX Ethernet domain, labeled Capture Station #2 (25 MHz) targeting 17 signals; one in the TX Ethernet domain, labeled Capture Station #3 (25 MHz) targeting 17 signals; and finally one in the compact flash clock domain, labeled Capture Station #4 (33 MHz) targeting 178 signals. Each of these stations operates in parallel, and is able to make selective observations of any combination of signals. The final output of the analyzer tool is a waveform representing the clock-cycle accurate signal transactions in the actual silicon device as shown in Figure 4.


Figure 4: Example SoC waveform (click figure to download PDF)




Luis Sanchez

2/20/2012 3:28 AM EST

For hardware and software debugging many times a snippet of code can be used to bring to hi an GPIO so that our oscilloscope can see when the event actually happens. Of course, this only allows us to troubleshoot until a certain level or layer.

Sign in to Reply



Please sign in to post comment

Navigate to related information

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)