Scribd
Upload
27 views

Managing an S18 DRC violation if you have a custom OCC (and not the Synopsys DW OCC)

The document explains the occurrence of S18 DRC violations when using a custom OCC in designs, particularly during scan insertion with DFT Compiler, which generates an SPF based on the default Synopsys DW OCC. To resolve the violation, it suggests removing an extra ATE clock pulse from the SPF file or ensuring the ATE clock is off during that cycle. It also notes that if the custom OCC requires the extra pulse, removing it may lead to scan chain blockages.

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
27 views

Managing an S18 DRC violation if you have a custom OCC (and not the Synopsys DW OCC)

The document explains the occurrence of S18 DRC violations when using a custom OCC in designs, particularly during scan insertion with DFT Compiler, which generates an SPF based on the default Synopsys DW OCC. To resolve the violation, it suggests removing an extra ATE clock pulse from the SPF file or ensuring the ATE clock is off during that cycle. It also notes that if the custom OCC requires the extra pulse, removing it may lead to scan chain blockages.

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/ 2

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

Dec 11, 2019 • Knowledge

Title
Managing an S18 DRC violation if you have a custom OCC (and not the Synopsys DW OCC)

Description
Question:

Why do we get an S18 DRC violation when we have custom OCC in the design? How do we resolve this violation?

Answer:

We get an S18 violation with custom OCC in the design:

If you do the scan insertion using DFT Compiler using the existing OCC flow (that means you have your custom OCC),
then the SPF generated by DFT Compiler is by the default DW OCC (Synopsys) design. This approach requires an extra
ATE clock pulse between the CAPTURE and LOAD_UNLOAD procedure to switch from one mode to another.
In the SPF (generated by DFT Compiler), this extra pulse is named as "Internal_scan_pre_shift" or
"ScanCompression_mode_pre_shift," depending on whether you have a regular scan or ScanCompression, respectively.

This extra vector looks like the example: "load_unload" { W "_default_WFT_"; C { "test_so"=X; "test_si"=0; "rst_b"=1;
"ate_clk"=0; "ref_clk"=0; "test_se"=1; } extra--> "Internal_scan_pre_shift" : V { "ate_clk" = P; "ref_clk" = P; "_si" = NN;
"_so" = XX; "test_se" = 1; } Shift { W "_default_WFT_"; V { "_si"=#; "_so"=#; "ate_clk"=P; "ref_clk"=P; } } }

Now, if you take the same SPF to TetraMAX for pattern generation using the custom OCC, you will get an S18 DRC
violation.

If your OCC design does not require any extra ATE pulses to switch from CAPTURE mode to LOAD_UNLOAD mode. An
S18 violation appears because this extra ATE clock pulse may disturb the captured value in the scan flops.

NOTE: This extra pulse is completely valid and is compulsory if you are inserting the Synopsys DW OCC.

To resolve the S18 DRC violation, remove this extra pulse from the SPF file. You should not get any additional S18
violations in that case or you can make sure the ATE clock is off during that extra cycle. The new SPF should look like one
of the following examples:

Remove the extra vector completely: "load_unload" { W "_default_WFT_"; C { "test_so"=X; "test_si"=0; "rst_b"=1;
"ate_clk"=0; "ref_clk"=0; "test_se"=1; } Shift { W "_default_WFT_"; V { "_si"=#; "_so"=#; "ate_clk"=P; "ref_clk"=P; } } } OR:
Make the ATE clock off ("ate_clk" = 0;) in that extra vector: "load_unload" { W "_default_WFT_"; C { "test_so"=X;
"test_si"=0; "rst_b"=1; "ate_clk"=0; "ref_clk"=0; "test_se"=1; } "Internal_scan_pre_shift" : V { "ate_clk" = 0; "ref_clk" = P;
"_si" = NN; "_so" = XX; "test_se" = 1; } Shift { W "_default_WFT_"; V { "_si"=#; "_so"=#; "ate_clk"=P; "ref_clk"=P; } } }

NOTE: You will not get any S18 violation if your OCC (custom) is designed to require the extra pulse while switching from
CAPTURE mode to LOAD_UNLOAD mode. In that case, removing the extra pulse will cause scan chain blockages.

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

Additional Product(s)

Article Number
000011255

Last Published Date


12/11/2019, 12:27 PM

Article Record Type


How To

URL Name
Managing-an-S18-DRC-violation-if-you-have-a-custom-OCC-and-not-the-Synopsys-DW-OCC-1576091211661

Was this article helpful? 0 0

Recommended Articles

Why Am I Getting D9 Violations in the OCC Insertion Flow?

Why Do I Get an S1 DRC Violation in wrp_of Mode When Using an OCC Pipeline Clock?

Resolving V13 DRC Violations Caused By Different OCC -cycles_per_clock Values

What Do R10 and R11 DRC Violations Mean?

How to configure SPC Disable feature in SPF for TestMAX ATPG DRC purposes

Related Files (0)

Article Com... (0) (/s/relatedlist/ka01U000001dljfQAA/Article_Comments__r) New

Saved Articles (0) (/s/relatedlist/ka01U000001dljfQAA/Saved_Articles__r) New

You might also like