skip to main content
research-article

Simulation-based functional verification of dynamically reconfigurable systems

Published:10 March 2014Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Dynamically reconfigurable systems (DRS) implemented using field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) allow hardware logic to be partially reconfigured while the rest of the design continues to operate. By mapping multiple reconfigurable hardware modules to the same physical region of an FPGA, such systems are able to time-multiplex their modules at runtime and adapt themselves to changing execution requirements. This architectural flexibility introduces challenges for verifying system functionality. New simulation approaches are required to extend traditional simulation techniques to assist designers in testing and debugging the time-varying behavior of DRS. This article summarizes our previous work on ReSim, the first tool to allow cycle-accurate yet physically independent simulation of a DRS reconfiguring both its logic and state. Furthermore, ReSim-based simulation does not require changing the design for simulation purposes and thereby verifies the implementation-ready design instead of a variation of the design. We discuss the conflicting requirements of simulation accuracy and verification productivity in verifying DRS designs and describe our approach to resolve this challenge. Through a range of case studies, we demonstrate that ReSim assists designers in detecting fabric-independent bugs of DRS designs and helps to achieve verification closure of DRS design projects.

References

  1. Florian Altenried. 2009. Time-sharing of hardware resources for image processing accelerators using dynamic partial reconfiguration. Bachelor's thesis. Technical University of Munich. (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Altera. 2010. Increasing design functionality with partial and dynamic reconfiguration in 28-nm FPGAs (WP01137). Altera Inc. http://www.altera.com/literature/wp/wp-01137-stxv-dynamic-partial-reconfig.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Christian Beckhoff, Dirk Koch, and Jim Torresen. 2010. Short-circuits on FPGAs caused by partial runtime reconfiguration. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications (FPL). 596--601. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Christophe Bobda, Mateusz Majer, Ali Ahmadinia, Thomas Haller, Andre Linarth, and Jurgen Teich. 2005. The Erlangen slot machine: Increasing flexibility in FPGA-based reconfigurable platforms. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Field-Programmable Technology (FPT). 37--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Ediz Cetin, Oliver Diessel, Lingkan Gong, and Victor Lai. 2013. Towards bounded error recovery time in FPGA-based TMR circuits using dynamic partial reconfiguration. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications (FPL).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Christopher Claus, Johannes Zeppenfeld, Florian Muller, and Walter Stechele. 2007. Using partial-run-time reconfigurable hardware to accelerate video processing in driver assistance system. In Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE). 1--6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Rolf Drechsler. 2004. Advanced Formal Verification. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Stephanie Drzevitzky, Uwe Kastens, and Marco Platzner. 2009. Proof-carrying hardware: Towards runtime verification of reconfigurable modules. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Reconfigurable Computing and FPGAs (ReConFig). 189--194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Lingkan Gong. 2013. ReSim case studies. http://code.google.com/p/resim-simulating-partial-reconfiguration/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Lingkan Gong and Oliver Diessel. 2011a. Modeling dynamically reconfigurable systems for simulation-based functional verification. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM). 9--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Lingkan Gong and Oliver Diessel. 2011b. ReSim: A reusable library for RTL simulation of dynamic partial reconfiguration. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Field-Programmable Technology (FPT). 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Lingkan Gong and Oliver Diessel. 2012. Functionally verifying state saving and restoration in dynamically reconfigurable systems. In Proceedings of the ACM/SIGDA International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA). 241--244. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Lingkan Gong, Oliver Diessel, Johny Paul, and Walter Stechele. 2013. RTL simulation of high performance dynamic reconfiguration: A video processing case study. In Proceedings of the International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Simen Gimle Hansen, Dirk Koch, and Jim Torresen. 2013. Simulation framework for cycle-accurate RTL modeling of partial run-time reconfiguration in VHDL. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Reconfigurable Communication-Centric Systems-on-Chip (ReCoSoC). 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Yoshihiro Ichinomiya, Shiro Tanoue, Motoki Amagasaki, Masahiro Iida, Morihiro Kuga, and Toshinori Sueyoshi. 2010. Improving the robustness of a softcore processor against SEUs by using TMR and partial reconfiguration. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM). 47--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Abelardo Jara-Berrocal and Ann Gordon-Ross. 2010. VAPRES: A virtual architecture for partially reconfigurable embedded systems. In Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE). 837. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Wayne Luk, Nabeel Shirazi, and Peter Y. K. Cheung. 1997. Compilation tools for run-time reconfigurable designs. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM). 56--65. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Katarina Paulsson, Michael Hubner, Markus Jung, and Jurgen Becker. 2006. Methods for run-time failure recognition and recovery in dynamic and partial reconfigurable systems based on Xilinx Virtex-II Pro FPGAs. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on Emerging VLSI Technologies and Architectures. 1--6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Andreas Raabe, Philipp A. Hartmann, and Joachim K. Anlauf. 2008. ReChannel: Describing and simulating reconfigurable hardware in SystemC. ACM Trans. Des. Autom. Electron. Syst. 13, 1, 15. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Ian Robertson and James Irvine. 2004. A design flow for partially reconfigurable hardware. ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst. 3, 2, 257--283. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Andreas Schallenberg, Wolfgang Nebel, Andreas Herrholz, and Philipp A. Hartmann. 2009. OSSS+R: A framework for application level modelling and synthesis of reconfigurable systems. In Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE) 970--975. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Pete Sedcole, Peter Y. K. Cheung, George A. Constantinides, and Wayne Luk. 2007. Run-time integration of reconfigurable video processing systems. IEEE Trans. VLSI Syst. 15, 9, 1003--1016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Andre Seffrin, Alexander Biedermann, and Sorin A. Huss. 2010. Tiny-n: A novel formal method for specification, analysis, and verification of dynamic partial reconfiguration processes. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering of Reconfigurable Systems and Algorithms (CSREA). 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Satnam Singh and Carl J. Lillieroth. 1999. Formal verification of reconfigurable cores. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM). 25--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Simon Tam and Martin Kellermann. 2010. Fast Configuration of PCI Express Technology through Partial Reconfiguration (XAPP883). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Tim Todman, Peter Boehm, and Wayne Luk. 2012. Verification of streaming hardware and software codesigns. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Field-Programmable Technology (FPT). 147--150.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Michael J. Wirthlin and Brad L. Hutchings. 1998. Improving functional density using run-time circuit reconfiguration. IEEE Trans. VLSI Syst. 6, 2, 247--256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Xilinx. 2009a. PlanAhead software tutorial: Partial reconfiguration of a processor peripheral (UG744). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Xilinx. 2009b. Virtex-4 FPGA Configuration User Guide (UG071). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Xilinx. 2010a. ChipScope Pro 12.1 software and cores (UG029). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Xilinx. 2010b. EDK concepts, tools and techniques (UG683). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Xilinx. 2010c. Partial Reconfiguration User Guide (UG702). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Xilinx. 2010d. Virtex-5 FPGA Configuration User Guide (UG191). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Xilinx. 2010e. Virtex-6 FPGA Configuration User Guide (UG360). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Xilinx. 2011. Partial reconfiguartion - Can I insert chipscope cores within reconfigurable modules? Xilinx Inc. http://www.xilinx.com/support/answers/42899.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Xilinx. 2013. 7 Series FPGAs Configuration User Guide (UG470). Xilinx Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Simulation-based functional verification of dynamically reconfigurable systems

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)8
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!