Simulation Tests in the UVM Environments¶
With the exception of the “core testbench” for CV32E40P, the CORE-V environments are all UVM environments and the overall structure should be familiar to anyone with UVM experience. This section discusses the CORE-V-specific implementation details that affect test execution, and that are important to test writers. It attempts to be generic enough to apply to both the CV32E and CVA6 environments.
A unique feature of the CORE-V UVM environments is that a primary source of stimulus, and sometimes the only source of stimulus, comes in the form of a “test program” that is loaded into the testbench’s memory model and then executed by the core itself. The UVM test, environment and agents are often secondary sources of stimulus and sometimes do not provide any stimulus at all. This means it is important to draw a distinction between the “test program” which is a set of instructions executed by the core, and the “UVM test”, which is a testcase in the UVM sense of the word.
In this context a “test program” is set of RISC-V instructions that are loaded into the testbench memory. The core will starting fetching and executing these instructions when fetch_en is asserted. Test programs may be manually produced by a human or by a tool such as the UVM random instructor generator component of the environment. Test programs are coded either in RISC-V assembler or C. All of the randomly generated programs are RISC-V assembler .
The environment can support test programs regardless of how they are created. However, the environment needs to know two things about a test program:
- Is the program pre-existing, or does it need to be generated at run-time?
- Is the test program self-checking? That is, can it determine, on its own, the pass/fail criteria of a test program and can it signal this to the testbench?
Section RI5CY Testcases details how many of the test programs inherited from the RI5CY project are both pre-existing and self-checking. It is expected, but not required, that most of the pre-existing test programs will be self-checking.
Section ToDo introduces the operation of the random instruction generator and how it generates test programs. Here, the situation regarding to self-checking tests is inverted. That is, it is expected, but not required, that most of the generated test programs will not be self-checking.
The UVM environment is equipped to support four distinct types of test programs:
- Pre-existing, self-checking The environment requires a memory image for the program to exist in the expected location, and will check the “status flags ” virtual peripheral for pass/fail information.
- Pre-existing, not self-checking The environment requires a memory image for the program to exist in the expected location, and will not check the “status flags” virtual peripheral for pass/fail information.
- Generated, self-checking The environment will use its random instruction generator to create a test program, and will check the “status flags” virtual peripheral for pass/fail information.
- Generated, not self-checking The environment will use its random instruction generator to create a test program, and will not check the “status flags” virtual peripheral for pass/fail information.
- None It is possible to run a UVM test without running a test program. An example might be a test to access CSRs via the debug module interface interface in debug mode.
Although five types are supported, it is expected that types 1 and 4 will predominate.
Simulations pass/fail outcomes will also be affected by other checkers/monitors that are not part of the status flags virtual peripheral. It is required that any such checkers/monitors shall signal an error condition with `uvm_error(), and these will cause a simulation test to fail, independent of what the test program may or may not write to the status flags virtual peripheral.
It is possible to use an instruction generator to write out a set of test programs, self checking or not, and run these as if they were pre-existing test programs. From the environment’s perspective, this indistinguishable from type 1 or type 2.
The programs can be written to execute any legal instruction supported by the core . Programs have access to the full address range supported by the memory model in the testbench plus a small set of memory-mapped “virtual peripherals”, see below.
A SystemVerilog module called mm_ram is located at $PROJ_ROOT/cv32/tb/core/mm_ram.sv. It connects to the core as shown in Illustration 4: Phase 1 CV32E40P UVM Environment. In addition to supporting the instruction, data memory (dp_ram), and debug memory (dbg_dp_ram), this module implements a set of virtual peripherals by responding to write cycles at specific addresses on the data bus. These virtual peripherals provides the features listed in Table 1.
The printer and status flags virtual peripherals are used in almost every assembler testcase provided by the RISC-V foundation for their ISA compliance test-suite. As such, these virtual peripherals will be maintained throughout the entire CORE-V verification effort. It is also believed, but not known for certain, that the signature writer is used by several existing testcases, so this peripheral may also be maintained over the long term.
The debug control virtual peripheral is used by a test program to control the debug_req signal going to the core. The assertion can be a pulse or a level change. The start delay and pulse duration is also controllable. Once the debug_req is seen by the core, it will enter debug mode and start executing code located at DM_HaltAddress, which is mapped to the debug memory (dbg_dp_ram).
The debug memory is loaded with a hex image defined with the plusarg +debugger=<filename.hex>
If the +debugger plusarg is not provided, then the debug memory will have a single default instruction, dret, that will result in the core returning back to main execution of the test program. The debug_test is an example of a test that will use the debug control virtual peripheral and provide a specific debugger code image.
The use of the interrupt timer control and instruction memory stall controller are not well understood and it is possible that none of the testscases inherited from the RISC-V foundation or the PULP-Platform team use them. As such they are likely to be deprecated and their use by new test programs developed for CORE-V is strongly discouraged.
|Virtual Peripheral||VP Address (data_addr_i)||Action on Write|
|Address Range Check||>= 2**16, but not one||Terminate simulation TODO: make this a `uvm_fatal()|
|Virtual Printer||32’h1000_0000||$write(“%c”, wdata[7:0]);|
|Interrupt Timer Control||32’h1500_0000||timer_irg_mask <= wdata;|
timer_count <= wdata;
This starts a timer that counts down each clk cycle.
When timer hits 0, an interrupt (irq_o) is asserted.
|Debug Control||32’h1500_0008||Asserts the debug_req signal to the core. debug_req can be a pulse or a level change, with a programable start delay and pulse duration as determined by the wdata fields:|
|wdata = debug_req signal value|
|wdata = debug request mode: 0= level, 1= pulse|
|wdata = debug pulse duration is random|
|wdata[28:16] = debug pulse duration or pulse random max range|
|wdata = start delay is random|
|wdata[14:0] = start delay or start random max rangee|
|Random Number Generator||32’h1500_1000||Reads return a random 32-bit value with generated by the simulator’s random number generator. Writes have no effect.|
|Virtual Peripheral Status Flags||32’h2000_0000||
Assert test_passed if wdata==’d123456789
Assert test_failed if wdata==’d1
Note: asserted for one clk cycle only.
exit_value <= wdata;
Note: asserted for one clk cycle only.
|Signature Writer||32’h2000_0008||signature_start_address <= wdata;|
|32’h2000_000C||signature_end_address <= wdata;|
Write contents of dp_ram from sig_start_addr to sig_end_addr to the signature file.
Signature filename must be provided at run-time using a
Note: this will also asset exit_valid with exit_value <= 0.
|Instruction Memory Interface Stall Control||32’h1600_XXXX||Program a table that introduces “random” stalls on IMEM I/F.|
Table 1: List of Virtual Peripherals
A UVM Test is the top-level object in every UVM environment. That is, the environment object(s) are members of the testcase object, not the other way around. As such, UVM requires that all tests extend from uvm_test and the CV32E environment defines a “base test”, uvmt_cv32_base_test_c, that is a direct extension of uvm_test. All testcases developed for CV32E should extend from the base test, as doing so ensures that the proper test flow discussed here is maintained (it also frees the test writer from much mundane effort and code duplication). The comment headers in the base test (attempt to) provide sufficient information for the test writer to understand how to extend it for their needs.
A typical UVM test for CORE-V will extend three time consuming tasks:
- reset_phase(): often, nothing is done here except to call super.reset_phase() which will invoke the default reset sequence (which is a random sequence). Should the test writer wish to, this is where a test-specific reset virtual sequence could be invoked.
- configure_phase(): in a typical UVM environment, this is a busy task. However, assuming the program executed the core does so, the core’s CSRs do not require any configuration before execution begins. Any test that requires pre-compiled programs to be loaded into instruction memory should do that here.
- run_phase(): for most tests, this is where the procedural code for the test will reside. A typical example of the run-flow here would be: - Raise an objection; - Assert the core’s fetch_en input; - Wait for the core and/or environment(s) to signal completion; - Drop the objection.
The CV32E base test, uvmt_cv32_base_test_c, in-lines code (using `include) from uvmt_cv32_base_test_workaround.sv. This file is a convenient place to put workarounds for defects or incomplete code in either the environment or RTL that will affect all tests. This file must be reviewed before the RTL is frozen, and ideally it will be empty at that time.
Run-flow in a CORE-V Test¶
The test program in the CORE-V environment directly impacts the usual run-flow that is familiar to UVM developers. Programs running on the core are completely self-contained within their extremely simple execution environment that is wholly defined by the ISA, memory map supported by the dp_mem and the virtual peripherals supported by mm_mem . This execution environment knows nothing about the UVM environment, so the CORE-V UVM environments are implemented to be aware of the test program and to respond accordingly as part of the run-flow.
Section Test Program introduced the five types of core test programs supported by the CORE UVM environment and section UVM Test showed how the configure_phase() and run_phase() of a CORE-V UVM run-flow implement the interaction between the UVM environment and the test program. This interaction is depends on the type of test program. Illustration 8 shows how the CORE-V UVM base test supports a type 1 test program.
In the self-checking scenario, the testcase is pre-compiled into machine code and loaded into the dp_ram using the $readmemh() DPI call. The next sub-section explains how to select which test program to run from the command-line. During the configuration phase the test signals the TB to load the memory. The TB assumes the test file already exists and will terminate the simulation if it does not.
In the run phase the base test will assert the fetch_en input to the core which signals it to start running. The timing of this is randomized but keep in mind that it will always happen after reset is de-asserted (because resets are done in the reset phase, which always executes before the run phase).
At this point the run flow will simply wait for the test program to flag that it is done via the status flags virtual peripheral. The test program is also expected to properly assert the test pass or test fail flags. Note that the environment will wait for the test flags to asserts or until the environment’s watch dog timer fires. A watch-dog firing will terminate the simulation and is, by definition, a failure.
The flow for a type 4 (generated, non-self checking) test program is only slightly different as shown in Illustration 9. In these tests the configure phase will invoke the generator to produce a test program and the toolchain to compile it before signalling the TB to load the machine code into dp_mem. As before, the run phase will assert fetch_en to the core and the program begins execution.
Recall that a type 4 test program will not use the status flags virtual peripheral to signal test completion. It is therefore up to the UVM environment to detect end of test. This is done when the various agents in the environment detect a lack of activity on their respective interfaces. The primary way to detect this is via the Instruction-Retire agent (TODO: describe this agent).
In a non-self-checking test program the intelligence to determine pass/fail must come from the environment. In the CORE-V UVM environments this is done by scoreboarding the results of the core execution and those predicted by the ISS as shown in . Note that most UVM tests that run self-checking test programs will also use the ISS as part of its pass/fail determination.
CORE-V Testcase Writer’s Guide¶
File Structure of the Test Programs and UVM Tests¶
Below is a somewhat simplified view of the CV32 tests directory tree. The test programs are in cv32/tests/core. (This should probably be cv32/tests/programs, but is named “core” for historical reasons.) Sub-directories below core contain a number of type 1 test programs.
The UVM tests are located at cv32/tests/uvmt_cv32. It is a very good idea to review the code in the base-tests sub-directory. In “core-program-tests” is the type 1 and type 4 testcases (types 2 and 3 may be added at a later date). These ca be used as examples and are also production level tests for either type 1 or type 4 test programs. An up to date description of the testcases under uvmt_cv32 can be found in the associated README.
Lastly, the cv32/tests/vseq directory is where you will be (and should add) virtual sequences for any new testcases you develop.
$PROJ\_ROOT/ └── cv32/ └── tests/ ├── core/ │ ├── README.md │ ├── custom/ │ │ ├── hello_world.c │ │ └── <etc> │ ├── riscv_compliance_tests_firmware/ │ │ ├── addi.S │ │ └── <etc> │ ├── riscv_tests_firmware/ │ │ └── <etc> │ └── firmware/ │ └── <etc> └── uvmt_cv32/ ├── base-tests/ │ ├── uvmt_cv32_base_test.sv │ ├── uvmt_cv32_base_test_workarounds.sv │ └── uvmt_cv32_test_cfg.sv ├── core-program-tests/ │ ├── README.md │ └── uvmt_cv32_type1_test.sv │ └── uvmt_cv32_type4_test.sv └── vseq/ └── uvmt_cv32_vseq_lib.sv
Writing a Test Program¶
This document will probably never include a detailed description for writing a test program. The core’s ISA is well documented and the execution environment supported by the testbench is trivial. The best thing to do is check out the examples at $PROJ_ROOT/cv32/tests/core.
Writing a UVM Test to run a Test Program¶
The CV32 base test, uvmt_cv32_base_test_c, has been written to support all five of the test program types discussed in Section Test Program.
There are pre-existing UVM tests for type 1 (pre-existing, self-checking) and type 4 (generated, not-self-checking) tests for CV32E40P in the core-v-verif repository. If you need a type 2 or type 3 test, have a look at these and it should be obvious what to do.
At $PROJ_ROOT/cv32/tests/uvmt_cv32/bin/test_template you will find a shell script that will generate the shell of a testcase that is compatible with the base test. This will save you a bit of typing.
Running the testcase¶
Testcases are intended to be launched from $PROJ_ROOT/cv32/sim/uvmt_cv32. The README at this location is intended to provide you with everything you need to know to run an existing testcase or a new testcase. If this is not the case, please create a GitHub issue and assign it to @mikeopenhwgroup.
|||Those familiar with the RI5CY testbench may recall that random generation of C programs using csmith was supported. Csmith was developed to exercise C compilers, not processors, it is not supported in the CORE-V environments.|
|||See Section Virtual Peripherals.|
|||Generation of illegal or malformed instructions is also supported, and will be discussed in a later version of this document.|
|||This is termed Execution Environment Interface or EEI by the RISC-V ISA.|