Skip to content

SVA: default sequence semantics #1071

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 22, 2025
Merged

Conversation

kroening
Copy link
Member

SVA sequences can have weak or strong semantics. 1800-2017 16.12.2 Sequence property requires that sequences in properties that are not explicitly marked as strong or weak are interpreted as weak when used in assert property or assume property, and strong otherwise.

The Verilog type checker now emits corresponding expressions sva_implict_weak and sva_implicit_strong for uses of SVA sequences in properties.

@kroening kroening force-pushed the sva-default-sequence-semantics branch 2 times, most recently from 3393d40 to 667f067 Compare April 19, 2025 18:04
SVA sequences can have weak or strong semantics.  1800-2017 16.12.2 Sequence
property requires that sequences in properties that are not explicitly
marked as strong or weak are interpreted as weak when used in assert
property or assume property, and strong otherwise.

The Verilog type checker now emits corresponding expressions
sva_implict_weak and sva_implicit_strong for uses of SVA sequences in
properties.
@kroening kroening force-pushed the sva-default-sequence-semantics branch from 667f067 to 94e4f4d Compare April 19, 2025 18:06
@kroening kroening marked this pull request as ready for review April 19, 2025 18:36
Copy link
Collaborator

@tautschnig tautschnig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there any way in which we'd actually notice a difference between these different semantics? My reading of the changes is that for now we just keep track of whatever was the input configuration, but ultimately still have just one semantics?

@kroening
Copy link
Member Author

Is there any way in which we'd actually notice a difference between these different semantics? My reading of the changes is that for now we just keep track of whatever was the input configuration, but ultimately still have just one semantics?

Yes, the use of it is in #1067

@tautschnig tautschnig merged commit f24a826 into main Apr 22, 2025
9 checks passed
@tautschnig tautschnig deleted the sva-default-sequence-semantics branch April 22, 2025 14:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants