home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!sgigate!odin!fido!cricket.asd.sgi.com!kumarv
- From: kumarv@cricket.asd.sgi.com (Kumar Venkat)
- Newsgroups: comp.lsi.testing
- Subject: Re: to test or not to test
- Message-ID: <paj5034@fido.asd.sgi.com>
- Date: 1 Sep 92 20:29:51 GMT
- References: <17ul8mINNhgu@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>
- Sender: news@fido.asd.sgi.com (Usenet News Admin)
- Reply-To: kumarv@cricket.asd.sgi.com (Kumar Venkat)
- Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA
- Lines: 50
-
-
-
- For those who see the light and decide that testing
- is necessary, there are still a number of questions
- regarding WHAT to test and HOW MUCH to test. This
- is from a design engineer's point of view.
-
- The majority of companies/managers/engineers that
- believe in testing simply invest in an ATPG tool
- that generates tests for single stuck-at faults. There is usually very
- little consideration given to
- real defect modes in real chips and how these defects map into various
- fault models (stuck-ats,
- bridging faults, transistor gate open, etc.).
-
- It is difficult to know exactly what defect modes
- to test for (and what fault models to use in order
- to reasonably cover these defects). Even if one
- decides on fault models somehow, getting proven ATPG
- tools that can cover those faults directly or
- indirectly is quite difficult. Even if appropriate
- ATPG tools can be found, getting the ASIC vendor
- to accept "non-standard" test vectors (such as
- delay fault testing using scan, or IDDQ testing)
- is a difficult task in general.
-
- Thus, most people settle for some kind of scan
- structure (full/partial) and a stuck-at fault
- model, because that is the easiest thing to do.
- Fault coverage in the high 90's makes people feel
- good about what they have done, especially when
- they hear from the foundry that 60% of the chips
- from a lot didn't pass the scan tests.
-
- Then comes the question of how much to test. Design-
- for-test typically comes at a price (area,timing),
- but DFT is usually necessary to keep fault coverage
- high. How much fault coverage is good enough,
- especially when one uses a stuck-at model and does
- not know what real defects are being covered ? Note
- that process yield is also unknown most of the time.
-
-
-
-
- -Kumar Venkat
-
- Silicon Graphics, Inc.
- (415) 390-5320
- kumarv@sgi.com
-