Advertisement

Journal of Electronic Testing

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 151–164 | Cite as

RTL DFT Techniques to Enhance Defect Coverage for Functional Test Sequences

  • Hongxia Fang
  • Krishnendu Chakrabarty
  • Hideo Fujiwara
Article

Abstract

Functional test sequences are often used in manufacturing testing to target defects that are not detected by structural test. However, they suffer from low defect coverage since they are mostly derived in practice from existing design-verification test sequences. Therefore, there is a need to increase their effectiveness using design-for-testability (DFT) techniques. We present a DFT method that uses the register-transfer level (RTL) output deviations metric to select observation points for an RTL design and a given functional test sequence. Simulation results for six ITC′99 circuits show that the proposed method outperforms two baseline methods for several gate-level coverage metrics, including stuck-at, transition, bridging, and gate-equivalent fault coverage. Moreover, by inserting a small subset of all possible observation points using the proposed method, significant fault coverage increase is obtained for all benchmark circuits.

Keywords

DFT Output deviations RT-level Test-point insertion Unmodeled defects 

References

  1. 1.
    Ahmed N, Tehranipoor M, Jayaram V (2006) Timing-based delay test for screening small delay defects. In: Design automation conference, pp 320–325Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aktouf C, Fleury H, Robach C (2000) Inserting scan at the behavioral level. IEEE Des Test Comput 17:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bushnell ML, Agrawal VD (2000) Essentials of electronic testing. Kluwer Academic, NorwellGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cho KY, Mitra S, McCluskey EJ (2005) Gate exhaustive testing. In: International test conference, pp 771–777Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corno F, Reorda MS, Squillero G (2000) RT-level ITC’99 benchmarks and first ATPG result. IEEE Des Test Comput 17:44–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dey S, Potkonjak M (1994) Non-scan design-for-testability of RT- level data paths. In: International conference on computer-aided design, pp 640–645Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drako D, Cohen P (1998) HDL verification coverage. In: Integrated system designGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fang H, Chakrabarty K, Jas A, Patil S, Trimurti C (2009) RT-level deviation-based grading of functional test sequences. In: VLSI test symposium, pp 264–269Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fujiwara H, Iwata H, Yoneda T, Ooi Y (2008) A nonscan design-for- testability method for register-transfer-level circuits to guarantee linear- depth time expansion models. IEEE Trans Comput-aided Des Integr Circuits Syst 27:1535–1544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gangaram V, Bhan D, Caldwell JK (2006) Functional test selection using dynamic untestability analysis. In: Internaltional workshop on microprocessor test and verificationGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gatej J et al (2002) Evaluating ATE features in terms of test escape rates and other cost of test culprits. In: International test conference, pp 1040–1049Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ghosh I, Fujita M (1999) Automatic test pattern generation for functional RTL circuits using assignment decision diagrams. In: Design automation conference, pp 43–48Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ghosh I, Raghunathan A, Jha NK (1995) Design for hierarchical testability of RTL circuits obtained by behavioral synthesis. In: IEEE international conference on computer design, pp 173–179Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghosh I, Raghunathan A, Jha NK (1998) A design for testability technique for RTL circuits using control/dataflow extraction. IEEE Trans Comput-aided Des Integr Circuits Syst 17:706–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goloubeva O, Jervan G, Peng Z, Reorda MS, Violante M (2002) High-level and hierarchical test sequence generation. In: HLDVT, pp 169–174Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grossman JP, Salmon JK, Ho CR, Ierardi DJ, Towles B, Batson B, Spengler J, Wang SC, Mueller R, Theobald M, Young C, Gagliardo J, Deneroff MM, Dror RO, Shaw DE (2008) Hierarchical simulation-based verification of Anton, a special-purpose parallel machine. In: IEEE international conference on computer design, pp 340–347Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guo R, Mitra S, Amyeen E, Lee J, Sivaraj S, Venkataraman S (2006) Evaluation of test metrics: Stuck-at, bridge coverage estimate and gate exhaustive. In: VLSI test symposium, pp 66–71Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guzey O, Wang L-C (2007) Coverage-directed test generation through automatic constraint extraction. In: HLDVT, pp 151–158Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hosokawa T, Inoue R, Fujiwara H (2007) Fault-dependent/independent test generation methods for state observable FSMs. In: Asian test symposium, pp 275–280Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huang Y, Tsai C-C, Mukherjee N, Samman O, Cheng W-T, Reddy SM (2002) Synthesis of scan chains for netlist descriptions at RT-level. Journal of Electronic Testing: Theory and Applications (JETTA) 18:189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Inoue R, Hosokawa T, Fujiwara H (2008) A test generation method for state-observable FSMs to increase defect coverage under the test length constraint. In: Asian test symposium, pp 27–34Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kang J, Seth SC, Gangaram V (2007) Efficient RTL coverage metric for functional test selection. In: VLSI test symposium, pp 318–324Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim H, Hayes JP (1998) High-coverage ATPG for datapath circuits with unimplemented blocks. In: International test conference, pp 577–586Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lin X et al (2006) Timing-aware atpg for high quality at-speed testing of small delay defects. In: Asian test symposium, pp 139–146Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lv T, Li H, Li X (2009) Automatic selection of internal observation signals for design verification. In: VLSI test symposium, pp 203–208Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mao W, Gulati RK (1996) Improving gate level fault coverage by RTL fault grading. In: International test conference, pp 150–159Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mathaikutty DA, Ahuja S, Dingankar A, Shukla S (2007) Model-driven test generation for system level validation. In: HLDVT, pp 83–90Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Maxwell PC, Hartanto I, Bentz L (2000) Comparing functional and structural tests. In: International test conference, pp 400–407Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Navabi Z (1997) VHDL: analysis and modeling of digital systems. McGraw-Hill, HightstownGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Norwood RB, McCluskey EJ (1996) Orthogonal scan: low overhead scan for data paths. In: International test conference, pp 659–668Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ravi S, Jha NK (2001) Fast test generation for circuits with RTL and gate-level views. In: International test conference, pp 1068–1077Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rearick J, Rodgers R (2005) Calibrating clock stretch during AC scan testing. In: International test conference, pp 266–273Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Santos MB, Goncalves FM, Teixeira IC, Teixeira JP (2001) RTL-based functional test generation for high defects coverage in digital systems. Journal of Electronic Testing: Theory and Applications (JETTA) 17:311–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Thaker PA, Agrawal VD, Zaghloul ME (1999) Validation vector grade (VVG): a new coverage metric for validation and test. In: VLSI test symposium, pp 182–188Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Thaker PA, Agrawal VD, Zaghloul ME (2000) Register-transfer level fault modeling and test evaluationtechniques for VLSI circuits. In: International test conference, pp 940–949Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vij AK (2002) Good scan=good quality level? well, it depends.... In: International test conference, p 1195Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wada H, Masuzawa T, Saluja KK, Fujiwara H (2000) Design for strong testability of RTL data paths to provide complete fault efficiency. In: IEEE international conference on VLSI design, pp 300–305Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wang Z, Chakrabarty K (2008) Test-quality/cost optimization using output-deviation-based reordering of test patterns. IEEE Trans Comput-aided Des Integr Circuits Syst 27:352–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wang Z, Fang H, Chakrabarty K, Bienek M (2009) Deviation-based LFSR reseeding for test-data compression. IEEE Trans Comput-aided Des Integr Circuits Syst 29:259–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Yogi N, Agrawal VD (2006) Spectral RTL test generation for gate-level stuck-at faults. In: Asian test symposium, pp 83–88Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hongxia Fang
    • 1
  • Krishnendu Chakrabarty
    • 1
  • Hideo Fujiwara
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  2. 2.Graduate School of Information ScienceNara Institute of Science and TechnologyNaraJapan

Personalised recommendations