• Skip to main content
  • Skip to search
  • Skip to footer
Cadence Home
  • This search text may be transcribed, used, stored, or accessed by our third-party service providers per our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.

  1. Community Forums
  2. Functional Verification
  3. SV Coverage Sequence: Bad Pointer Access Error

Stats

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1
  • Subscribers 65
  • Views 13102
  • Members are here 0
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

SV Coverage Sequence: Bad Pointer Access Error

ethand
ethand over 16 years ago
Hi,

This question relates to SV coverage sequences. I’m encountering a bad pointer access error when I try to compare for coverage sequences that are long and could potentially have a recursive effect. For example, the following sequence causes a bad pointer access.

       bins usb_downstream_host_sof = (

                                                      DNS_HOST_SOF => PACKET_X [*0:1] =>

                                                      DNS_HOST_SOF => PACKET_X [*0:1] =>

                                                      DNS_HOST_SOF => PACKET_X [*0:1] =>

                                                      DNS_HOST_SOF => PACKET_X [*0:1] =>

                                                      DNS_HOST_SOF => PACKET_X [*0:1] =>

                                                      DNS_HOST_SOF => PACKET_X [*0:1] =>

                                                      DNS_HOST_SOF => PACKET_X [*0:1] =>

                                                      DNS_HOST_SOF => PACKET_X [*0:1]

                                                    );

The above sequence looks for SOF, followed by PACKET_X zero or one time (i.e. it’s optional), followed by SOF, etc. The entire sequence looks for 8 SOFs and 8 PACKET_Xs. The recursive aspect of this sequence is that after the first SOF, subsequent finding of another SOF will start another thread of sequence comparison while the first sequence is confirming a match for the second SOF. This process could create multiple parallel sequence comparisons for the same bin.

The simulation memory usage appears to be reaching 3.2G or higher just before the bad pointer access occurs. Is this an inherent limit of the SV coverage sequences scheme? Has anyone encountered a similar problem in the past and can suggest ways to resolve or work around this?

Thank you for your time and help!

 

Ethan
  • Cancel
  • Akshayk1
    Akshayk1 over 16 years ago

    You can try repetative syntax like [*8] with just one time written pattern.

    i don't know if it wil work or not but just try and even let me know if it works.

    Thanks

    Akshay

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel

Community Guidelines

The Cadence Design Communities support Cadence users and technologists interacting to exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices to solve problems and get the most from Cadence technology. The community is open to everyone, and to provide the most value, we require participants to follow our Community Guidelines that facilitate a quality exchange of ideas and information. By accessing, contributing, using or downloading any materials from the site, you agree to be bound by the full Community Guidelines.

© 2025 Cadence Design Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy
  • Cookie Policy
  • US Trademarks
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information