[pwm,dv] Exclude an unreachable item of block coverage #25135
Conversation
This cannot happen because of a constant wiring value. Signed-off-by: Rupert Swarbrick <[email protected]>
rswarbrick
force-pushed
the
pwm-manual-exclusion-2
branch
from
de96e7c to
0ebaf51
Compare
|
I think the rejigged version of #25140 is a bit cleaner than the old version. It also no longer conflicts with this change! So I've squashed things together and the PR is now a clean single commit. |
|
This is specific to xcelium. It is troubling since our sign-off tool is VCS. Perhaps this hole doesn't show up in VCS so an exclusion is not needed there? |
|
The signoff tool is defined by the block's sim_cfg hjson file. For |
|
When reviewing the block for this I noticed the registers spec is missing regwens. I filed #25688 for this. |
| Waive block coverage for a conditional which is true if the 'we' signal is true for the | ||
| REGWEN in register in prim_subreg_arb. If the signal is true, this denotes a write to the | ||
| register from hardware but the instantiation in pwm_reg_top wires it to zero. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry Rupert, I don't understand this: in pwm_reg_top.sv the we input of u_regwen is connected to regwen_we, and from this comment I thought that is what you refer to. Could you clarify?
This cannot happen because of a constant wiring value.
Note: This PR depends on #25088. Once that is merged, this PR will only contain the last commit.(No longer true)