Back to the Building Blocks’ Building Blocks
The article discusses the challenges associated with Verilog, a hardware description language, and its potential to introduce bugs in hardware design. It draws parallels between Verilog and memory-unsafe programming languages like C and C++, emphasizing the need for better hardware description languages (HDLs). The author advocates for a deeper understanding of Verilog's flaws to prevent future hardware issues as custom hardware design becomes more prevalent.
- ▪Verilog is widely used in hardware design but is often criticized for being frustrating and error-prone.
- ▪The article compares the risks associated with Verilog to those of memory-unsafe programming languages, suggesting that similar issues could arise in hardware.
- ▪The author calls for investment in understanding Verilog's problems to develop better HDLs that can reduce the frequency of hardware bugs.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
This post is based on a keynote I gave at Dagstuhl Seminar #26042, Trustworthy System Architectures for the Age of Custom Silicon. Many thanks to the seminar's organizers and to the Dagstuhl staff for a fun and enlightening workshop. If there are hardware engineers who love Verilog, I haven’t met them. Almost universally, the attitude toward Verilog seems to be that it’s frustrating, ridiculous, error-prone, and the only pragmatic choice. Verilog is inescapable because it is the input format to essentially every EDA tool. Its centrality means that it is a de facto intermediate representation implementing for every other HDL: even if you prefer Bluespec, Chisel, Amaranth, or Spade, they all have to compile to Verilog to interact with the rest of the hardware world.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Cornell.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Cornell
