Comparing Methods for the Cross-Level Verification of SystemC Peripherals with Symbolic Execution

September 05, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Karl Aaron Rudkowski, Sallar Ahmadi-Pour, Rolf Drechsler arXiv ID 2509.05504 Category cs.PL: Programming Languages Cross-listed cs.AR Citations 0 Venue IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Virtual Prototypes (VPs) are important tools in modern hardware development. At high abstractions, they are often implemented in SystemC and offer early analysis of increasingly complex designs. These complex designs often combine one or more processors, interconnects, and peripherals to perform tasks in hardware or interact with the environment. Verifying these subsystems is a well-suited task for VPs, as they allow reasoning across different abstraction levels. While modern verification techniques like symbolic execution can be seamlessly integrated into VP-based workflows, they require modifications in the SystemC kernel. Hence, existing approaches modify and replace the SystemC kernel, or ignore the opportunity of cross-level scenarios completely, and would not allow focusing on special challenges of particular subsystems like peripherals. We propose CrosSym and SEFOS, two opposing approaches for a versatile symbolic execution of peripherals. CrosSym modifies the SystemC kernel, while SEFOS instead modifies a modern symbolic execution engine. Our extensive evaluation applies our tools to various peripherals on different levels of abstractions. Both tools' extensive sets of features are demonstrated for (1) different verification scenarios, and (2) identifying 300+ mutants. In comparison with each other, SEFOS convinces with the unmodified SystemC kernel and peripheral, while CrosSym offers slightly better runtime and memory usage. In comparison to the state-of-the-art, that is limited to Transaction Level Modelling (TLM), our tools offered comparable runtime, while enabling cross-level verification with symbolic execution.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Programming Languages

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted