Skip to content
DenseChip
Learn
PracticeCode labInterview

DenseChip

Navigate

Menu

LearnPracticeCode labInterview

Tools

All toolsSV editorCode repoResume
DenseChip

Practice, courses, and chip-design tools in one focused workspace.

LearnPracticeCode labInterviewToolsLearning paths

© 2026 DenseChip

AboutRoadmapCareersInternshipsFAQContactPrivacyTerms
Skip to lesson

Course contents

  • How to Use This Course
  • Protocol Metrics Reference
  • Protocols Glossary
  • Reading Path
  • Protocol Fundamentals25
  • AMBA Family (APB / AHB / AXI)17
  • Coherence Fabrics (ACE / CHI)17
  • Memory Interfaces (DDR / LPDDR / HBM)17
  • PCIe & CXL17
  • Embedded Peripherals (I2C / SPI / UART)17
  • High-Speed I/O (USB / Ethernet / MIPI)17
  • Protocol Verification & Compliance21
    • VIP & Agent Architecture
    • Scoreboard & Checker Strategy
    • Compliance & Coverage Plan
      • Compliance & Coverage Plan: Concepts
      • Compliance & Coverage Plan: Integration
      • Compliance & Coverage Plan: Debug
      • Compliance & Coverage Plan: Interview
    • Protocol Waveform Debug
    • Bus Integration Lab
    • Protocol Verification & Compliance: Tricky Q&A
  • Protocols Interview Prep5
  • Interface Protocols Cheatsheet
Loading lesson

←Compliance & Coverage Plan
  1. Topics
  2. Bus Protocols
  3. Protocol Verification & Compliance
  4. Compliance & Coverage Plan
  5. Compliance & Coverage Plan: Concepts
On this page

    Interface ProtocolsAll levels

    Compliance & Coverage Plan: Concepts

    Concepts for Compliance & Coverage Plan.

    Core concepts

    Requirement traceability

    For every applicable requirement, define what evidence would demonstrate the intended behaviour and whether the plan observes the relevant boundary and conditions. A test may need a checker; a coverage bin may need an assertion or model comparison. A requirement with no adequate evidence is a compliance gap.

    Waivers and exclusions should identify the requirement/bin, reason, reachability or risk analysis, evidence reviewed and responsible approver. They make residual risk visible; they do not turn an unverified requirement into a verified one.

    Close evidence gaps without relabelling a waiver as verification. Requirement-to-evidence repair loop, not a compliance certificate. A supported result can close its applicable obligation at review. Acceptance of an unresolved risk is a separate disposition and supplies no missing verification result.
    Requirement-to-evidence repair loop, not a compliance certificate. A supported result can close its applicable obligation at review. Acceptance of an unresolved risk is a separate disposition and supplies no missing verification result.

    What to notice

    • A test name or coverage hit alone is not the obligation's checked result.

    • The repair loop creates new evidence; recording a waiver does not turn the missing result into PASS.

    Check yourself Where does the repair loop re-enter the evidence flow?

    It re-enters at stimulus and independent checking, then produces new recorded evidence for review. Accepted risk remains a separate unverified disposition.

    A small requirement-to-evidence matrix

    Requirement / chosen contract

    Stimulus

    Checker

    Evidence required before closure

    AXI stalled W retains VALID/payload

    Hold WREADY low, then accept; vary payload and gap

    Previous-sample retention predicate

    Clean legal replay plus isolated changed/withdrawn-offer detection.

    B follows accepted AW and final W

    W-first, AW-first, simultaneous; premature B offer

    Saved prerequisite state before this edge

    Legal variants pass; premature offer detected with BREADY=0.

    Same-port same-ID reads preserve association

    Two queued ID 3 reads, ID 7 overlap, second port

    Per-port per-ID FIFO and independent data oracle

    Legal cross-ID/port returns pass; wrong head/port rejected.

    Chosen coordinated-reset cancellation policy

    Reset with one pending read, then reuse its ID

    Epoch-local outstanding state; orphan detection

    Cancelled count recorded; no old response admitted after release.

    Check yourself All four scenarios were sampled in coverage. Are the requirements verified?

    Not from coverage alone. Retain the checker verdicts, nonzero accepted-event counts, applicable configuration and source revision, negative-case sensitivity, reviewed limitations and actual execution evidence. Authored cases without a run remain pending.

    Coverage types for protocols

    Protocol coverage can cross applicable transaction types, burst shapes, ID relationships and ordering scenarios. State coverage records selected states/transitions. Error injection should cover supported and risk-relevant responses and recovery paths, with exclusions documented.

    Closing 100% of a chosen coverage model means its included bins were sampled; it does not establish that each result was correct or that the model contains every relevant scenario.

    • Coverage exclude: document why a bin is unreachable (e.g., tied-off input).

    • Constrained-random: constraints define the legal scenario space.

    • Regression cadence is a project policy: run the appropriate compliance subset at a frequency that preserves feedback time, and run the signoff configuration before release.

    Apply the mechanism

    Continue to the integration exercise

    Then trace a failure

    Previous

    140 / 158

    Next: Compliance & Coverage Plan: Integration

    Up next

    Up nextCompliance & Coverage Plan: Integration

    Sign in to save progress

    Practice this lessonPrevious lessonReport an error

    See also

    • Compliance & Coverage Plan: Debug
    • Compliance & Coverage Plan: Interview