Infrastructure IP for configuration and test of boards and systems

Clark, CJ; Ricchetti, Mike

doi:10.1109/mdt.2003.1198689

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are many more constraints that must be applied to a circuit to prevent the test from affecting the operation of a system (e.g., active backplane signals). These issues have been covered in great detail by [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] and [6].…”

Section: Board-centric Testing Vs Multidrop Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These are shown in figures 4 and 5. Figure 4 shows a board containing a dedicated hardware co-processor device [2,5,6,7] that applies JTAG tests to the UUT and provides persistent GO/NO-GO status information to the on-board CPU once the test is complete. This co-processor is a separate hardware block or soft-core that may autonomously apply tests to the local scan chain(s).…”

Section: Board-centric Testing Vs Multidrop Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are two primary versions ( [8,9] [10,11,12,13,14]) of interfaces and a few proprietary ones ( [2,5]). All are not compatible with each other.…”

Section: Traps and Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

JTAG-based vector and chain management for system test

Treuren

Peterson

Miranda

IEEE International Conference on Test, 2005.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an embedded boundary-scan test vector management solution that ensures the correct version of test vectors is applied to the Unit Under Test (UUT). This new vector management approach leverages the system-level boundary-scan multi-drop architecture employed in some high availability electronic systems. Compared to previous methods that do not use system-level boundary-scan resources for vector management, this new approach ensures that the correct boundary-scan vectors are retrieved from the UUT without affecting its operation and requires minimal UUT functionality to execute. The performance and effectiveness of this technique is shown using an actual design example that has been realized in a new product.

show abstract

Section: Board-centric Testing Vs Multidrop Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Board-centric Testing Vs Multidrop Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%