2006
DOI: 10.1109/test.2006.297634
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Self-Checking and Self-Diagnosing 32-bit Microprocessor Multiplier

Abstract: In this paper, we propose a low-cost fault tolerance technique for microprocessor multipliers, both non-pipelined (NP) and pipelined (P)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The expansion for multiplication is based on a technique for self-verifying multipliers [16] with a low probability of fault escape.…”
Section: ) Operator Coverage Rulesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The expansion for multiplication is based on a technique for self-verifying multipliers [16] with a low probability of fault escape.…”
Section: ) Operator Coverage Rulesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On-line testing techniques to detect occurrence of a soft fail is necessary to enable architectural solutions like single bit correction and double bit detection via Error Correction Code (ECC), and operational retry procedures after concurrent detection [8] [9]. Operational retry is also utilized by Yilmaz et al [10] to test soft vs.…”
Section: Background and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…al. also applied the same scheme for distinguishing between soft and hard fail in their fault-tolerant multiplier design [10], it has not been utilized in BIST design for SER characterization.…”
Section: A Pattern Generationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This scheme includes a totally self-checking, 2-rail checker which can detect all faults except the ones in the primary inputs and primary outputs. Yilmaz et al [28] detect errors in a recursive multiplier by using a modulo-3 checker. The authors report 26% area overhead and almost 99% fault coverage for this scheme.…”
Section: Options For Error Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%