Content deleted Content added
m unpiped links using script. endmatter formatting. ref fix. |
|||
(79 intermediate revisions by 58 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|IC design techniques that include testability features}}
'''Design for Test''' (aka "Design for Testability" or "DFT") is a name for [[Integrated circuit design | design]] techniques that add certain testability features to a [[integrated circuit | microelectronic]] hardware product design. The premise of the added features is that they make it easier to develop and apply manufacturing tests for the designed hardware. The purpose of manufacturing tests is to validate that the product hardware contains no defects that could adversely affect the product’s correct functioning.▼
▲'''Design for
Tests are applied at several steps in the [[Semiconductor fabrication|hardware manufacturing]] flow and, for certain products, may also be used for hardware maintenance in the customer’s environment. The tests generally are driven by [[Automated testing|test programs]] that execute in [[Automatic test equipment|Automatic Test Equipment]] (ATE) or, in the case of system maintenance, inside the assembled system itself. In addition to finding and indicating the presence of defects (i.e., the test fails), tests may be able to log [[diagnostic]] information about the nature of the encountered test fails. The diagnostic information can be used to locate the source of the failure. ▼
▲Tests are applied at several steps in the [[Semiconductor fabrication|hardware manufacturing]] flow and, for certain products, may also be used for hardware maintenance in the
DFT plays an important role in the development of test programs and as an interface for test application and diagnostics. [[Automatic test pattern generation]], or ATPG, is much easier if appropriate DFT rules and suggestions have been implemented.▼
In other words, the response of vectors (patterns) from a good circuit is compared with the response of vectors (using the same patterns) from a DUT (device under test). If the response is the same or matches, the circuit is good. Otherwise, the circuit is not manufactured as intended.
▲DFT plays an important role in the development of test programs and as an interface for test
== History ==
DFT techniques have been used at least since the early days of electric/electronic data processing equipment. Early examples from the 1940s/50s are the switches and instruments that allowed an engineer to
Over the years the industry has developed and used a large variety of more or less detailed and more or less formal guidelines for desired and/or mandatory DFT circuit modifications. The common understanding of DFT in the context of [[
▲Over the years the industry has developed and used a large variety of more or less detailed and more or less formal guidelines for desired and/or mandatory DFT circuit modifications. The common understanding of DFT in the context of [[Electronic design automation|Electronic Design Automation]] (EDA) for modern microelectronics is shaped to a large extent by the capabilities of commercial DFT software tools as well as by the expertise and experience of a professional community of DFT engineers researching, developing, and using such tools. Much of the related body of DFT knowledge focuses on digital circuits while DFT for analog/mixed-signal circuits takes somewhat of a backseat.
▲== Objectives of DFT for Microelectronics Products ==
DFT affects and depends on the methods used for test development, test application, and diagnostics.
Most tool-supported DFT practiced in the industry today, at least for digital circuits, is predicated on a ''Structural test'' paradigm. Structural test makes no direct attempt to determine if the overall functionality of the circuit is correct. Instead, it tries to make sure that the circuit has been assembled correctly from some low-level building blocks as specified in a structural [[netlist]]. For example, are all specified [[logic gate]]s present, operating correctly, and connected correctly? The stipulation is that if the netlist is correct, and structural testing has confirmed the correct assembly of the circuit elements, then the circuit should be functioning correctly.
Note that this is very different from ''[[Acceptance test|
One benefit of the Structural paradigm is that test generation can focus on testing a limited number of relatively simple circuit elements rather than having to deal with an exponentially exploding multiplicity of functional [[State (computer science)|state]]s and state transitions. While the task of testing a single logic gate at a time sounds simple, there is an obstacle to overcome. For
Depending on the DFT choices made during circuit design/implementation, the generation of Structural tests for complex logic circuits can be more or less [[Automatic test pattern generation|automated]] or self-automated.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eng.tau.ac.il/~bengal/SCI_paper.pdf|title=Self-correcting inspection procedure under inspection errors|author=Ben-Gal I., Herer Y. and Raz T.|publisher=IIE Transactions on Quality and Reliability, 34(6), pp. 529-540.|year=2003|access-date=2014-01-10|archive-date=2013-10-13|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131013171945/http://www.eng.tau.ac.il/~bengal/SCI_paper.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>[http://www.eng.tau.ac.il/~bengal/SCI_paper.pdf] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131013171945/http://www.eng.tau.ac.il/~bengal/SCI_paper.pdf |date=2013-10-13 }}</ref> One key objective of DFT methodologies, hence, is to allow designers to make trade-offs between the amount and type of DFT and the cost/benefit (time, effort, quality) of the test generation task.
Another benefit is to diagnose a circuit in case any problem emerges in the future. It is like adding some features or provisions in the design so that devices can be tested in case of any fault during its use.
▲One benefit of the Structural paradigm is that test generation can focus on testing a limited number of relatively simple circuit elements rather than having to deal with an exponentially exploding multiplicity of functional [[State (computer science)|state]]s and state transitions. While the task of testing a single logic gate at a time sounds simple, there is an obstacle to overcome. For today’s highly complex designs, most gates are deeply embedded whereas the test equipment is only connected to the primary [[Input/output]]s (I/Os) and/or some physical test points. The embedded gates, hence, must be manipulated through intervening layers of logic. If the intervening logic contains state elements, then the issue of an exponentially exploding [[state space]] and state transition sequencing creates an [[Computational complexity theory|unsolvable problem]] for test generation. To simplify test generation, DFT addresses the accessibility problem by removing the need for complicated state transition sequences when trying to control and/or observe what’s happening at some internal circuit element.
== Looking forward ==
One challenge for the industry is keeping up with the [[Moore's law
== Diagnostics ==
Especially for advanced semiconductor technologies, it is expected some of the chips on each manufactured [[Wafer (electronics)|wafer]] contain defects that render them non-functional. The primary objective of testing is to find and separate those non-functional chips from the fully functional ones, meaning that one or more responses captured by the tester from a non-functional chip under test differ from the expected response. The percentage of chips that fail test, hence, should be closely related to the expected functional yield for that chip type. In reality, however, it is not uncommon that all chips of a new chip type arriving at the test floor for the first time fail (so
In both cases, vital information about the nature of the underlying problem may be hidden in the way the chips fail during test. To facilitate better analysis, additional fail information beyond a simple pass/fail is collected into a fail log. The fail log typically contains information about when (e.g., tester cycle), where (e.g., at what tester channel), and how (e.g., logic value) the test failed. Diagnostics attempt to derive from the fail log at which logical/physical ___location inside the chip the problem most likely started. By running a large number of failures through the diagnostics process, called volume diagnostics, systematic failures can be identified.
In some cases (e.g., [[
DFT approaches can be more or less diagnostics-friendly. The related objectives of DFT are to facilitate
== Scan design ==
The most common method for delivering test data from chip inputs to internal ''circuits under test'' (CUTs, for short), and observing their outputs, is called scan-design. In scan
Straightforward application of scan techniques can result in large vector sets with corresponding long tester time and memory requirements. [[Test compression]] techniques address this problem, by decompressing the scan input on chip and compressing the test output. Large gains are possible since any particular test vector usually only needs to set and/or examine a small fraction of the scan chain bits.
The output of a scan design may be provided in forms such as [[Serial Vector Format]] (SVF), to be executed by test equipment.
== Debug using DFT features ==
In addition to being useful for manufacturing "go/no go" testing, scan chains can also be used to "debug" chip designs.
article by Ron Wilson, EDN, 6/21/2007</ref>
== See also ==
* [[Built-in self-test|BIST]]
* [[Design for X]]
* [[Fault grading]]
* [[Iddq testing]]
* [[JTAG]]
== References ==
{{Reflist}}
''Electronic Design Automation For Integrated Circuits Handbook'', by Lavagno, Martin and Scheffer, ISBN 0849330963 A survey of the field, from which much of this summary was derived, with permission.▼
{{refbegin}}
* [http://focus.ti.com/lit/an/ssya002c/ssya002c.pdf IEEE Std 1149.1 (JTAG) Testability Primer] A technical presentation on Design-for-Test centered on JTAG and Boundary Scan
* ''VLSI Test Principles and Architectures'', by L.T. Wang, C.W. Wu, and X.Q. Wen, Chapter 2, 2006. Elsevier.
▲* ''Electronic Design Automation For Integrated Circuits Handbook'', by Lavagno, Martin and Scheffer, {{ISBN
{{refend}}
==External links==
* [http://www.corelis.com/education/Tips_DFT_Considerations_Boundary_Scan_Chain.htm Boundary-Scan Chain Design]
* [http://www.corelis.com/education/Tips_DFT_Considerations_Board_Level_Design.htm Board Level Design]
* [https://www.xjtag.com/about-jtag/design-for-test-guidelines/ Design for Testability Guidelines]
[[Category:Electronic design automation]]
[[Category:Hardware testing]]
[[Category:Design for X]]
|