• 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. Functional Coverage at SOC or Sub System Level

Stats

  • Replies 1
  • Subscribers 65
  • Views 1302
  • Members are here 0

Functional Coverage at SOC or Sub System Level

TM202505254140
TM202505254140 3 months ago

Hi All,

At subsystem or SOC verification level,

let’s say there are three IPs integrated : IP1, IP2 and IP3.

Individually from block level verification, all IPs functional coverage is achieved 100%.
IP1 FC 100%
IP2 FC 100%
IP3 FC 100%

But at the subsystem level, when I run some tests or regression, functional coverage is still 60 to 70%. What would be the understanding here?

case_1 : We need to still add tests to make 100% coverage even at SOC level
case_2 : Getting coverage (code or FC) 70% at SOC level is still acceptable, no need to wait for 100% coverage since individually all IPs are already verified.

So, Now I need to sign-off. Can I proceed with just 70% coverage at SOC level,
requesting everyone to share thoughts here.
I am interesting in measuring sign off factors at SOC or sub system level.

Kindly provide your inputs.

  • Sign in to reply
  • Cancel
Parents
  • StephenH
    StephenH 29 days ago

    This is quite an academic question. Coverage is simply a metric to tell you what you have not exercised in your verification process. I think most engineers would not aim to re-verify all the internals of an IP further up the integration levels, thus trying to achieve 100% coverage on the IP makes no sense and would add significantly to the cost of verifying the subsystem or SoC. Focus on verifying the integration of the IP into the subsystem - this tends to be more about exercising use cases and ensuring that the subsystem behaves correctly with the IP in it.

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Sign in to reply
    • Cancel
Reply
  • StephenH
    StephenH 29 days ago

    This is quite an academic question. Coverage is simply a metric to tell you what you have not exercised in your verification process. I think most engineers would not aim to re-verify all the internals of an IP further up the integration levels, thus trying to achieve 100% coverage on the IP makes no sense and would add significantly to the cost of verifying the subsystem or SoC. Focus on verifying the integration of the IP into the subsystem - this tends to be more about exercising use cases and ensuring that the subsystem behaves correctly with the IP in it.

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Sign in to reply
    • Cancel
Children
No Data

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