[sv-ec] RE: iff within transition bins

Thanks, Dave. I added a note there.

Dmitry

From: Rich, Dave [mailto:Dave_Rich@mentor.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:14 PM
To: Dmitry Korchemny; sv-ec@eda-stds.org
Subject: RE: iff within transition bins

http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=4735



From: owner-sv-ec@eda.org<mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org> [mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org]<mailto:[mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org]> On Behalf Of Dmitry Korchemny
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 2:15 AM
To: sv-ec@eda-stds.org<mailto:sv-ec@eda-stds.org>
Subject: [sv-ec] iff within transition bins

Hi,

I think that the semantics of iff construct for transition bins should be clarified in the LRM. There is no explanation in 19.5.2 Specifying bins for transitions.

The definition in 19.5.1 Specifying bins for values reads: "The expression within the iff construct at the end of a bin definition provides a per-bin guard condition. If the expression is false at a sampling point, the count for the bin is not incremented." This definition is ambiguous for transition bins.

The definition provided for iff construct for coverpoints (19.5 Defining coverage points) is neither satisfactory for transition bins: "The expression within the iff construct specifies an optional condition that disables coverage for that coverpoint. If the guard expression evaluates to false at a sampling point, the coverage point is ignored."

My understanding is that when iff condition does not hold at any of the sampling points of a transition bin, the current attempt of the transition bin is aborted (if I understand correctly, there may be overlapping attempts because of goto or non-consecutive repetitions). I.e., iff should act as sequence throughout operator.

Thanks,
Dmitry


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
believed to be clean.

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