editor's blog
Subscribe Now

A New Verb for Hardware Engineers

Ever since malloc() (and it’s other-language counterparts), software engineers have had an extra verb that is foreign to hardware engineers: “destroy.”

Both software and hardware engineers are comfortable with creating things. Software programs create objects and abstract entities; hardware engineers create hardware using software-like notations in languages like Verilog. But that’s where the similarity ends. Software engineers eventually destroy that which they create (or their environment takes care of it for them… or else they get a memory leak). Hardware engineers do not destroy anything (unless intentionally blowing a metal fuse or rupturing an oxide layer as a part of an irreversible non-volatile memory-cell programming operation).

So “destroy” is not in the hardware engineer’s vocabulary. (Except in those dark recesses perambulated only on those long weekends of work when you just can’t solve that one problem…)

This is mostly not a problem, since software and hardware engineers inhabit different worlds with different rules and different expectations. But there is a place where they come together, creating some confusion for the hardware engineer: interactive debugging during verification.

SystemVerilog consists of much more than some synthesizable set of constructs. It is rife with classes from which arise objects, and objects can come and go. This is obvious to a software engineer, but for a hardware engineer in the middle of an interactive debug session, it can be the height of frustration: “I know I saw it, it was RIGHT THERE! And now it’s gone! What the…”

This was pointed out by Cadence when we were discussing the recent upgrades to their Incisive platform. The verification engineers that set up the testbenches are generally conversant in the concepts of both hardware and software, but the designer doing debug may get tripped up by this. Their point being, well, that hardware engineers need to remember that the testbench environment isn’t static in the way that the actual design is: they must incorporate “destroy” into their vocabulary.

Leave a Reply

featured blogs
Nov 15, 2019
As we seek to go faster and faster in our systems, heat grows as does the noise from the cooling fans. It is because of this heat and noise, many companies are investigating or switching to submersible cooling (liquid immersion cooling) options. Over the last few years, subme...
Nov 15, 2019
Electronic design is ever-changing to adapt with demand. The industry is currently shifting to incorporate more rigid-flex circuits as the preferred interconnect technology for items that would otherwise be off-board, or require a smaller form factor. Industries like IoT, wea...
Nov 15, 2019
"Ey up" is a cheery multi-purpose greeting that basically means "Hello" and "Hi there" and "How are you?" and "How's things?" all rolled into one....
Nov 15, 2019
[From the last episode: we looked at how intellectual property helps designers reuse circuits.] Last week we saw that, instead of creating a new CPU, most chip designers will buy a CPU design '€“ like a blueprint of the CPU '€“ and then use that in a chip that they'€™re...
Nov 15, 2019
Last week , I visited the Cadathlon@ICCAD event at the 2019 International Conference on Computer Aided Design . It was my first CADathlon and I was quite intrigued , since the organizers webpage... [[ Click on the title to access the full blog on the Cadence Community site. ...