MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904651897 · doi:10.1109/fpl.2018.00076

An FPGA Overlay Architecture Supporting Rapid Implementation of Functional Changes during On-Chip Debug

2018· article· en· W2904651897 on OpenAlexaff
Al-Shahna Jamal, Jeffrey Goeders, Steven J. E. Wilton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebuggingOverlayEmbedded systemComputer scienceField-programmable gate arrayObservabilityBackground debug mode interfaceOverhead (engineering)Design flowComputer architectureControl flowHigh-level synthesisChipSystem on a chipComputer hardwareOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Field-Programmable Gate Arrays become more complex, debugging designs implemented on these devices has become increasingly time-consuming. For many types of bugs, simulation is not sufficient, and the only way to uncover the root cause of unexpected behaviour is to run the design in hardware at speed. Many techniques that support on-chip debug have been described; typically, these techniques involve instrumenting the design to increase observability. In this paper, we describe instrumentation that not only increases observability, but that can also be used to control certain aspects of the design. Supported functional changes include applying small deviations in the control flow of the circuit, or the ability to override signal assignments to perform efficient "what if'" tests. Our approach uses a novel overlay architecture which allows these changes to be implemented during debug without recompiling the design. Changes can be made in seconds, dramatically reducing the time to perform a debug iteration. Our overlay is specifically optimized for designs created using a high-level synthesis (HLS) flow; by taking advantage of information from the HLS tool, the overhead of the overlay can be kept low.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207