Scribd
Upload
12 views3 pages

Why Is There A Coverage Loss When - What-If - Analysis Is Applied To Test Points

The document addresses a reduction in test coverage when performing 'What-If' analysis on test points, where coverage dropped from 92.70% to 91.14%. This occurs because the ATPG analysis uses Basic Scan mode instead of Fast-Sequential mode, leading to lower coverage estimates. To achieve better results, users are advised to compare Basic Scan ATPG results or insert control and observe test points into the netlist before re-running ATPG in Fast-Sequential mode.

Uploaded by

xylcool5
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
12 views3 pages

Why Is There A Coverage Loss When - What-If - Analysis Is Applied To Test Points

The document addresses a reduction in test coverage when performing 'What-If' analysis on test points, where coverage dropped from 92.70% to 91.14%. This occurs because the ATPG analysis uses Basic Scan mode instead of Fast-Sequential mode, leading to lower coverage estimates. To achieve better results, users are advised to compare Basic Scan ATPG results or insert control and observe test points into the netlist before re-running ATPG in Fast-Sequential mode.

Uploaded by

xylcool5
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

2021/6/3 Why is There a Coverage Loss When "What-If" Analysis is Applied to Test Points?

(/s/) Cases (/s/case-list) STARs (/s/star-list) Articles (/s/knowledge) Help (/s/help-info)

Dec 11, 2019 • Knowledge

Title
Why is There a Coverage Loss When "What-If" Analysis is Applied to Test Points?

Description
Question:

I am performing "What-If" analysis on my design and want to get an estimate of the test coverage improvement using the
test points calculated from the analyze_test_points command.

The following test coverage is reported with ATPG in Fast-Sequential mode using the set_atpg -capture_cycles 10
command:

-----------------------------------------------
total faults 83200
test coverage 92.70%
-----------------------------------------------

In the same TetraMAX session, I ran test point analysis and estimated the resulting test coverage using the following
commands:

analyze_test_points -target testability \


-test_points_file ./test_points_testability.lst
reset_state
update_faults -reset_au run_atpg -auto -observe_file ./test_points_testability.lst

The test coverage is as follows:

-----------------------------------------------
total faults 83200
test coverage 91.14%
-----------------------------------------------

Similar reductions in test coverage are reported when using other algorithms, such as the analyze_test_points –target
testability command or the analyze_test_points –target pattern_reduction command.

I expected to get an increase in test coverage after performing "What-If" analysis. But instead there is a reduction in test
coverage. Why is this occurring?

Answer:

The reduction in test coverage occurs because the run_atpg –observe_file command performs ATPG in Basic Scan
mode during analysis. This command does not use Fast-Sequential ATPG for estimating the coverage. To get the final test
coverage results, you can do either of the following:

1. Compare only Basic Scan ATPG results before and after "What-If" analysis using the following commands:

https://solvnetplus.synopsys.com/s/article/Why-is-There-a-Coverage-Loss-When-What-If-Analysis-is-Applied-to-Test-Points-1576092495490 1/3
2021/6/3 Why is There a Coverage Loss When "What-If" Analysis is Applied to Test Points?

add_faults -all
#enabling only basic scan ATPG
set_atpg -capture_cycles 0
run_atpg -auto
analyze_test_points -target testability \
-test_points_file ./test_points_testability.lst
reset_state
update_faults -reset_au
run_atpg -auto -observe_file ./test_points_testability.lst

2. The test_points_testability.lst file created by the analyze_test_points command in the first option above includes the
control and observe points, which are defined using set_test_point_element -type control/observe command. So to
insert the control and observe test points into the netlist, you need read the test points list file (i.e., the
test_points_testability.lst generated by TetraMAX ATPG ) by specifying the source test_points_testability.lst
command before the insert_dft command in DFT Compiler. Next, perform ATPG on this new netlist using Fast-
Sequential mode. Using this setting, the test coverage is typically better than the virtual test coverage reported by
"What-If" analysis.

Workaround

Product L1
TestMAX ATPG (/s/detail/01t1U000003IY0ZQAW)

Additional Product(s)

Article Number
000017456

Last Published Date


12/11/2019, 12:49 PM

Article Record Type


How To

URL Name
Why-is-There-a-Coverage-Loss-When-What-If-Analysis-is-Applied-to-Test-Points-1576092495490

Was this article helpful? 0 0

Recommended Articles

Performing what-if analysis for test coverage improvements with test points

Why is there coverage loss after multi-mode and Adaptive Scan insertion?

M170 Error Reported During 'What If' Analysis for Inserting Observe Points

Visualizing Test-Point Register Sharing in the Layout View


https://solvnetplus.synopsys.com/s/article/Why-is-There-a-Coverage-Loss-When-What-If-Analysis-is-Applied-to-Test-Points-1576092495490 2/3
2021/6/3 Why is There a Coverage Loss When "What-If" Analysis is Applied to Test Points?
Visualizing Test Point Register Sharing in the Layout View

Why Doesn't Test Coverage Improve After Reading an Observe File in run_atpg?

Related Files (0)

Article Com... (0) (/s/relatedlist/ka01U000001dnLvQAI/Article_Comments__r) New

Saved Articles (0) (/s/relatedlist/ka01U000001dnLvQAI/Saved_Articles__r) New

https://solvnetplus.synopsys.com/s/article/Why-is-There-a-Coverage-Loss-When-What-If-Analysis-is-Applied-to-Test-Points-1576092495490 3/3

You might also like