Talking About Mentor’s Tessent Streaming Scan Network and how it Addresses Next-Gen IC Test

There is a continuously-growing demand for next-generation ICs to deliver the extreme performance required for the explosion in fast-evolving applications such as AI and self-driving cars has put a tremendous amount of pressure on the size of IC designs, which can now integrate billions of transistors. For the IC developer, larger and more complex IC designs and their associated complexity translate to a dramatic rise in the time and cost required to test them. 

To address this issue and help silicon test teams manage these challenges, Mentor recently introduced Tessent Streaming Scan Network functionality to its Tessent TestKompress software. This includes embedded infrastructure and automation that decouples core-level DFT requirements from the chip-level test delivery resources, enabling a no-compromise, bottom-up DFT flow that can dramatically simplify DFT planning and implementation, while reducing test time significantly.

With full support for tiled designs and optimization for identical cores, it is ideal for increasingly large emerging compute architectures. Mentor’s Tessent Streaming Scan Network is a bus-based scan data distribution architecture that enables simultaneous testing of any number of cores, helping shorten test time by enabling high-speed data distribution. It efficiently handles imbalances between cores, and supports testing of any number of identical cores with a constant cost. It also provides a plug-and-play interface in each core that simplifies scan timing closure and is well-suited for abutted tiles.

The solution consists of a series of host nodes in each design block that are networked together. Each host distributes data between the network and the test structures in the block. The software automates the implementation, pattern generation, and failure reverse mapping processes. DFT engineers can fully optimize DFT test resources for each block without concern for impacts to the rest of the design. This helps to dramatically reduce the implementation effort. Along with optimized handling of identical cores, elimination of waste in the test data, and time multiplexing, this solution enables substantial reductions in test data time and volume.

On the input side, you can, for instance, just broadcast them all to the inputs. But on the output side, you somehow need some sort of way of selecting. So if you have like 1,000 cores and you got 100 pins or 10 pins, you can't test all of these cores at the same time. Typically, you test some of them at the same time, and then you test others in sequence. The advantage is, the more you can test at the same time, the shorter time does the test take. But then, you're going to run out of pins at some point.

So part of the challenge then, is to figure out, is which cores should I test at the same time? And we kind of typically, put them in what we call groups, meaning that a group is a set of these cores that you test at the same time. Then, you can kind of allocate five of those to this first core, and the other five to the second core, and do the same thing on the output side. You kind of make sure you connect five pins on one core and five pins to the other and see them to the top level. What we see more of is more nested cores where there's a core inside a core inside a core.

A plethora of cores

EE: Can you elaborate on the core issue?
Geir Eide: You got one big graphics core that goes on every chip. But inside the graphics core, you have other standard elements. And these standard elements have standard elements, right? So you get these more complex, multiple levels of hierarchies. Now, while the designs grow in size, we typically do not see an increase in the number of pins you can use for tests. If anything, that number is going down. And the reason for that is that your average SoC, whether it's something that goes in your phone or your computer or your car, tends to also have more and more of these high-speed pins, like USB ports and things like that.

Those pins are typically, not allowed to use for tests, because when you, for instance, throw additional circuitry like a multiplexer, then you slow things down. And test people have to stay away from those pins. So that means that there's more and more data that has to go through the same number of pins. Just to touch on one more thing here, we see, especially for chips that go into AI applications, we see huge numbers of identical cores. So many of these AI accelerators use in parallel, massive parallel processing. And there are designs here that have thousands of exactly the same core.

In that case, you would like to leverage the fact that they are identical, because then you want to leverage the fact that you can send all of the test data in at once, and just spread that out to all of these 1,000 cores. I don't have to test them, test one core after the other and kind of re-load the same data into the chip. You should leverage the fact that these are identical. 

So these are some of the things that then cause some challenges for testing and for this way of dealing with hierarchical designs that we talked about. And kind of, the main challenge here is that when we get more and more cores and levels of hierarchy, this design, hooking everything up, so the plumbing or the wiring, if you will, that becomes challenging, especially because the decisions on how you hook everything up, you have to do that as part of the design process.

For example, looking at your house, you have to plan all your wiring or plumbing before you put the walls in place and start painting, because at that point, if you change your mind, you kind of have to pull the walls back out and start over again. It's kind of the same thing here. So for instance, if I early on, I say that, "Okay, I want to test this core and that core at the same time," then the problem with that is that after you've done with all the wiring and later, after you taped out and you start to generate the tests that you're going to apply in manufacturing, you notice something, and you see over to the right here, in that like this, you test these two cores at the same time. But it turns out that one is taking much more time than the other. So then, there's kind of this wasted resources here that you're stuck dealing with.

 So you could fix that again, if you kind of tore out the walls and you decided, okay, I want to allocate more. Instead of hooking up five pins to one core and five to the other, I want to give the small guy just sorry, three pins and the other one seven. But now, you kind of go back and forth and it's more, again, you have to tear out the walls and kind of go back and also change the cores. And that is very resource intensive.

 And also, this approach that we are looking at here, for instance, doesn't really do anything for all the identical cores, because now yes, you can broadcast the same data on the input side, but you still need to kind of observe all of... At least, you need to observe something from each of these cores here. If you got the 1,000 cores, you need at least 1,000 output pins to test all of them, or you have to again, divide them into multiple groups, test them more sequentially.

Old problems
EE: Right. Now, one of the things that we're seeing in SOCs is the impact of migration and convergence, we're almost seeing a lot of the problems that board developers had back in the day now happening at the chip level.
Geir Eide: Yeah. And I think in a way, it goes a little bit back and forth. And that I think there are times where things were dealt with at the chip level starts showing up at board level. But yeah. No, it certainly is because now, I mean, that's kind of been the trend. I mean, that's why an SOC is called an SOC, right?

EE: Right.
Geir Eide: We kind of first saw this trend maybe 10 years ago when you started to go from just testing the entire chip as one blob to then, dividing it into cores. And when you started to do that again, you didn't pay too much attention in the wiring to just be able to at least deal with one core at a time. That was very effective and kind of similar to in the board world. Years ago, there were only so many chips on the board. But then, all of a sudden, that starts to explode, right?

EE: And heaven forbid you have to re-spin it.
Geir Eide:  Exactly. So some of the basic concepts that are the same. And you can argue actually, that some of the solutions that we're getting to here is actually some of the same as well. So again, the problem that we're trying to address here is kind of the complexity of the electrical wiring in our house, if you will. And so today, again, there are really two solutions here. Either you plan it very straightforward and I say, "I'm going to treat all of the cores the same, and they're going to get five pins each. I'm going to test no more than five at the same time," type of a thing. Or you can tear out the walls and go back and forth and spend much more time.

A streaming scan network

The benefit is then, you've reduced your manufacturing test costs. But again, you have to spend more engineering effort into it. So there's this trade off that that people deal with. What we're introducing, is something we called a streaming scan network or SSN, which is a different way of sending test data, distributing test data across the chip. So the idea is what you see in Figure 2. So instead of directly connecting the top-level pins to each core so you kind of got this spaghetti of wiring from the chip-level pins to all the cores, there is a dedicated bus. So there is a bus that basically connects on the top-level pins to one core at a time. You see, it connects to this blue box that's inside each core.

What this blue box does, is that you send data as packets on this bus, and each little box here understand what data actually is going to be used for this core. So we send data let's say, in a stream of packets on the bus and each node is smart enough to say, "Yep, those bits, those are mine. I'll grab those." And then, also knows when to put data back on the bus.

EE: What about layout and space and the like? How much complexity does it add to the overall solution?
Geir Eide: Well, the neat thing here is that from a layout point of view, this is much easier in the sense that you are now, rather than having all of the wires at the chip level that's spread out to all the cores, you're creating a network that goes from one core to the next.

With tile designs, there is basically no top-level routing. You just put one core to the next and squish them together, so to speak. So if you need to connect something from one core and over to the third core over here, you have to kind of go through the core in the middle. So from a routing perspective, this alleviates a lot of the potential routing transition that you see with kind of the more traditional to pin methodology that most people are using today.

The other thing that is really neat about this as well, is it decouples the core and the chip level. It used to be that when you determined what the test structure should be on the core, you really had to think about what happens when you put that core in a chip. So you need to know that how many pins do I have at top level? How many cores do I want to test in parallel? Because that determines so the chip level requirements kind of impacts what you do at the core level. So everything is kind of dependent.

Here, that no longer matters. This width of the bus here, the size of the bus, is completely independent of what happens at the core level. So the guy who designs the core, he can do his thing without even talking to the guy who puts everything together. That is the secret sauce here, because that's also important when again, with this Lego principle, where this one piece of this one core is going to be used in maybe 15 different chips, this graphics core. Even though it's the same company, even though it's not arm designing stuff that goes to some other company, even if it's within the company, people reuse stuff quite a bit. So now-

EE: Cores can be reused.
Geir Eide: Exactly. And not only now, not only the cores, but also, all of the test structures don't have to be re-tooled and re-modified based on which chip the core goes into. Just to show an example in Figure 3, is that they have a very simple design here with two cores, core A and core B. And what is happening here is that core A, we say we have five what we call scan cells. That means that you have five independent signals that you need to connect to to be able to send test data into the core. And for core B, it is four. The number of pins that you use for test access really depends kind of on the core itself. Typically, you want more pins makes the test time shorter. So it's kind of like think of it as kind of a rectangle. You can make it narrow and long, or you can make it short and wide.

So in this case, typically, if you were to test core A and core B at the same time, you would have had to have nine pins, nine pins to test the core B. Sorry four for core B, five for core A, if you wanted to send data to them at the same time. We have this SSM bus, which in this example is eight bits. Now, it could be any number of bits depending on the design. But in this case, we picked eight just to make it more interesting since we need nine bits of data to be able to start sending data into the core.

 So what happens is that we send data like what we call packets. And that's kind of a term that is used in network protocols and ethernet protocols. And kind of the idea here is somewhat similar. So a packet represents all of the data you need to kind of do one of these smallest type of test operations on a chip. So to just send one set of data to all of the cores, that's one data. And in this case, one packet is nine bits corresponding to the five channels on core A plus five on core B.

 And that's what all these letters mean inside of the packet here. It means the first bit of data for core A is bit one for core A, and so forth. So what you see here is this packet kind of wraps around the bus in that it's... So for this first packet, bit zero for core A is this the first bit on the bus. Then, the second bit for the second packet, you notice things rotate.

 So now, the clever thing about these light blue boxes here, these what we call the host nodes, where the secret sauce is, is again, that rather than just having this kind of dumb, hardwired connection from the top-level pins to the cores, there's like a little bit... I wouldn't go as far as calling it intelligence, but what it's like, these host nodes have to be smart enough to understand that this bit belong to me and then, this bit belong to me. And then that the decision of the data that they have to pick up kind of is in different locations. So they need to know exactly where and when is the data on the bus that I need to use?

 And similarly, for the output response here, those same time slots that I used to provide stimuli for the core, these time slots are also used to capture the output response. So as this packet moves across the bus, once that data is consumed, it is picked up by the host, before that packet moves on the bus, it gets replaced. That input data for the core gets replaced by the output data.

So, the idea here is that you can now test lots of cores at the same time, even though you don't change the number of pins you have at the chip level. And again, you don't have to worry about how many pins you have at the top level versus what's happening at the core level. So it's a decoupling of your core-level requirements and your chip-level requirements. That's the secret sauce here. And how that is enabled is kind of the magic that's in the circuitry and in these, what we call hosts.

Packetized bits

Now, the other thing that is very neat here is that now, this idea of like packetized test. We didn't invent the idea of a packet. There are other companies that have... I'm not aware of any other commercial solutions for this. Intel, for instance, did publish a paper and they published on an approach that also uses packetized tests. But the challenge that they ran into is that the way how they tell what core should have what data is that rather than just, what we call payload, the packets also contain an address. So it's like an address and data. Each packet says, "I belong to core A. And I belong to core B."

What we did instead is that something I haven't talked about is this green light and these small green boxes. This is like the programming of the host. That basically, is how you set up the host to say that for the data that's going to be sent to me soon, I'm going to pick up every 27th bit, or whatever the right number is. And that programming is done once per pattern set. And then, after that initial programming, everything is payload.

 And that also means that all these decisions of what do you test in parallel and what do you test sequentially, those decisions are not done hardwired during the design. And again, you can make those decisions after you have painted the walls in your house, to go back to that analogy.

EE: Got it.
Geir Eide:  In addition to the fact that you can kind of forget about things if you are... Not forget about things, but how the core-level configuration and the chip-level configuration are independent. What makes that possible is also that normally, with a traditional approach, when you test multiple cores in parallel, what we call the capture, which is when we're done pumping test data into the chip, and we run it in functional mode for a little bit, that's what we call capture, that typically has to happen at the same time.

 So if the amount of data we have to pump in is different and again, you deal with this padding. And the reason why capture has to be aligned is that a lot of these signals that tell the chip whether you are in functional mode or whether you are in this test mode, these signals are generated at the chip level. Whereas with our approach, all of those signals are generated by that host. And that allows us to kind of not have to do everything aligned or in sync. It can be done more independently.

The other thing when we talked about the packets here, again, it's a previous example, I said a packet in this case would be nine bits because we got five pins on one and four in the other. Now, what we can do is that if it turns out that core A requires much less data than core B, so rather than sending it five bits per packet, we can let's say, send it three bits per packet and kind of allocate more data to core B. If that makes more sense that that would kind of make them finish at the same time, that is something that this technology can do automatically. Rather than giving each core as much data as it has pins, if it doesn't need that much data to begin with, we can kind of automatically throttle or kind of reallocate the data stream.

Imagine if you got two faucets and you got two buckets, and if you try to take the shower and use the sink at the same time, you don't have enough water pressure. And if you're trying to fill two buckets that are of different size, you're just turn one faucet a little bit and have less water going into the small bucket. That's kind of what we're doing here as well. So this again, means that not only is it easier for the guy who implements things, but you also have these things that take care of the test cost aspect as well.