Automated Design Debugging With Maximum Satisfiability

Vennsa Technol., Inc., Toronto, ON, Canada
IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems (Impact Factor: 1). 12/2010; 29(11):1804 - 1817. DOI: 10.1109/TCAD.2010.2061270
Source: IEEE Xplore


As contemporary very large scale integration designs grow in complexity, design debugging has rapidly established itself as one of the largest bottlenecks in the design cycle today. Automated debug solutions such as those based on Boolean satisfiability (SAT) enable engineers to reduce the debug effort by localizing possible error sources in the design. Unfortunately, adaptation of these techniques to industrial designs is still limited by the performance and capacity of the underlying engines. This paper presents a novel formulation of the debugging problem using MaxSAT to improve the performance and applicability of automated debuggers. Our technique not only identifies errors in the design but also indicates when the bug is excited in the error trace. MaxSAT allows for a simpler formulation of the debugging problem, reducing the problem size by 80% compared to a conventional SAT-based technique. Empirical results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed formulation as run-time improvements of 4.5 × are observed on average. This paper introduces two performance improvements to further reduce the time required to find all error sources within the design by an order of magnitude.

20 Reads
  • Source
    • "In contrast, we restrict ourselves to verification queries and investigate the impact of substituting arbitrary counterexample producing verifiers with more powerful verifiers which produce counterexamples which are minimal or bounded. Verification techniques have been adapted to provide more meaningful counterexamples [12] [28] [35] [8] for the purpose of aiding design debugging. The key idea is that these more powerful verification engines that provide not just any arbitrary counterexamples but rather a simpler counterexample with respect to some metric can be used for better debugging. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Counterexample-guided inductive synthesis CEGIS is used to synthesize programs from a candidate space of programs. The technique is guaranteed to terminate and synthesize the correct program if the space of candidate programs is finite. But the technique may or may not terminate with the correct program if the candidate space of programs is infinite. In this paper, we perform a theoretical analysis of counterexample-guided inductive synthesis technique. We investigate whether the set of candidate spaces for which the correct program can be synthesized using CEGIS depends on the counterexamples used in inductive synthesis, that is, whether there are good mistakes which would increase the synthesis power. We investigate whether the use of minimal counterexamples instead of arbitrary counterexamples expands the set of candidate spaces of programs for which inductive synthesis can successfully synthesize a correct program. We consider two kinds of counterexamples: minimal counterexamples and history bounded counterexamples. The history bounded counterexample used in any iteration of CEGIS is bounded by the examples used in previous iterations of inductive synthesis. We examine the relative change in power of inductive synthesis in both cases. We show that the synthesis technique using minimal counterexamples MinCEGIS has the same synthesis power as CEGIS but the synthesis technique using history bounded counterexamples HCEGIS has different power than that of CEGIS, but none dominates the other.
    07/2014; 157. DOI:10.4204/EPTCS.157.10
  • Source
    • "Most of the previous works are at transistor-level [5] or gatelevel [6], [7] and they only address automatic error diagnosis for combinational circuits or sequential circuits assuming existence of full scan chain. Although there are some works such as [8], [9] which also propose automated correction , the correction process remains a manual task in most of those works. There are other works targeting RTL designs that try to find and correct errors in RTL descriptions. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper presents a method for automatic rectification of design bugs in processors. Given a golden sequential instruction-set architecture model of a processor and its erroneous detailed cycle-accurate model at the micro-architecture level, we perform symbolic simulation and property checking combined with concrete simulation iteratively to detect the buggy location and its corresponding fix. We have used the truth-table model of the function that is required for correction, which is a very general model. Moreover, we do not represent the truth-table explicitly in the design. We use, instead, only the required minterms, which are obtained from the output of our backend formal engine. This way, we avoid adding any new variable for representing the truth-table. Therefore, our correction model is scalable to the number of inputs of the truth-table that could grow exponentially. We have shown the effectiveness of our method on a complex out-of-order superscalar processor supporting atomic execution of instructions. Our method reduces the model size for correction by 6.0x and total correction time by 12.6x, on average, compared to our previous work.
    IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems 04/2014; E97-D(4):852-863. DOI:10.1587/transinf.E97.D.852 · 0.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The designer has to figure out these aspects manually. The approach of [17] improves the resolution in the timing domain -the formulation there is based on Maximum Satisfiability (MaxSAT), i.e., a solver that searches for the maximal subset of clauses being satisfiable. The formulation based on MaxSAT shows, that temporal information helps to explain the faulty behavior. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Today, there exist powerful algorithms for automated debugging. Some of the debugging algorithms focus on fault localization while others try to explain the faulty behavior by providing, e.g., correct traces that are similar to a failure trace. SAT-based debugging locates faults, but does not explain the faulty behavior, e.g., some temporal properties of fault candidates are not fully explored. In this work, we study the resolution of SAT-based debugging with respect to its capability to locate faults and to explain faults. A strategy is presented that increases the diagnostic resolution of SAT-based debugging by combining fault localization and fault explanation in one algorithm. The experimental results confirm the strength of the approach and give directions for further research.
    Microprocessor Test and Verification (MTV), 2010 11th International Workshop on; 01/2011
Show more


20 Reads
Available from