DV/Ibex: Keep vendoring in Ibex DV into OT?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- SystemVerilog
- Stars
- 3.6k
- Forks
- 1.1k
- Avg merge
- 2d 22h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 141
Description
Currently, we perform DV on Ibex in the Ibex repository. At the same time, we also vendor in the DV code from Ibex into OT. This is sometimes tricky, as we have duplicated some of our common DV infrastructure into Ibex, which give us, if we're not careful, slightly diverged versions of the same file. #2511 is one example.
The easiest solution to all of that would be the removal of all DV code when we vendor Ibex into OT, and do Ibex DV solely in the ibex repository.
However, this makes it harder for us to run Ibex DV in OT, if we wish to do so. That's the question: do we want to do that? For full chip regressions? Or for post-[synthesis/layout/...] regressions?
@sriyerg @sjgitty @rswarbrick
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Review the Ibex DV code vendored into OT and the duplicated common DV infrastructure, starting with the related example in issue #2511. Determine whether OT needs Ibex DV for full-chip or post-synthesis/layout regressions; done means documenting the decision and the resulting vendoring approach.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- testing-qa, tooling
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100