RE: [sv-ac] checker: why are parameters not allowed? Need to file a mantis?

Hi Ben,

This mantis already exists, see http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2111.

However, IMO there is little added value in introducing parameters to checkers. Checker invocation should be similar to a property's syntax, and not to a module's.

Say, you want to check that a request will be granted in n cycles. Then it is very natural to write it like this:

// invocation
request_granted rg1(req, gnt, 4, clk);

checker request_granted(request, grant, n, event clk);
                a: assert property (@clk request |-> ##n grant);
endchecker

Rather than to use this ugly syntax:
request_granted #(4) rg1 (req, gnt, clk);

checker request_granted #(n) (request, grant, event clk);
                a: assert property (@clk request |-> ##n grant);
endchecker

What is a benefit of introducing parameters for checkers in your opinion? Do you have a specific example?

Thanks,
Dmitry

From: Ben Cohen [mailto:hdlcohen@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 22:12
To: sv-ac@eda-stds.org; Korchemny, Dmitry; Eduard Cerny
Subject: [sv-ac] checker: why are parameters not allowed? Need tofile a mantis?

Dmitry,
Why are parameters not allowed in checkers, in the same style as module?
If we do allow them, would that bring more consistency in design style, and possibly simplify the design of tools because of this parallelism to modules?
Before I file a mantis for future exploration of this, I would like to hear your comments.
Thanks,
Ben
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.