• 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 in Transaction Class

Stats

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2
  • Subscribers 64
  • Views 14742
  • 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

Functional Coverage in Transaction Class

archive
archive over 18 years ago

Hi all,

When do data-oriented functional coverage, can we put the covergroup in transaction class directly? And is there any short guideline how to do?

For example,
I have transaction define class like:
//-----------
class video_pkg_c;
      rand bit [7:0]  opcode_1;
      rand bit [7:0]  opcode_2;
      rand bit [15:0] data;
      //----
      // can I add covergroup here?
      //----
endclass

class video_pkg_driver;
      ... ...
      video_pkg_c video_pkg;
      video_pkg = new();
      rand_result = video_pkg.randomize();
      ... ...
endclass
//-----------

I use IUS583.

Best regards,
Davy


Originally posted in cdnusers.org by davyzhu
  • Cancel
Parents
  • archive
    archive over 18 years ago

    Hi,

    Covergroups in transactions are usually not recommended. Classes in SV are often copied (cloned) when propagated through your testbench, e.g. when sending to the DUT and the scoreboard at the same time. This may result in counting each sampling event multiple times.

    The correct way is sampling the coverage using a monitor which is a singleton object. It will detect the sampling event from the signals and collect the coverage only on "real" transactions that actually made it to the DUT.

    Gabi


    Originally posted in cdnusers.org by Gabi
    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
Reply
  • archive
    archive over 18 years ago

    Hi,

    Covergroups in transactions are usually not recommended. Classes in SV are often copied (cloned) when propagated through your testbench, e.g. when sending to the DUT and the scoreboard at the same time. This may result in counting each sampling event multiple times.

    The correct way is sampling the coverage using a monitor which is a singleton object. It will detect the sampling event from the signals and collect the coverage only on "real" transactions that actually made it to the DUT.

    Gabi


    Originally posted in cdnusers.org by Gabi
    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • 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