You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Just noticed that when get_value is used in conjunction with SInt types, the values are treated as unsigned. An example is shown below, where the value 214 is returned instead of -42. It appears the reason is that the generated testbench code does not attach the signed attribute to signed signals. However, this only ends up impacting get_value, not expect.
to insert the signed modifier for SInt types, but then I think the above expect code (and probably poke code, which I think also uses process_value, so I think just updating process_value might work) would need to be changed to not convert the value to the unsigned representation.
Just noticed that when
get_value
is used in conjunction withSInt
types, the values are treated as unsigned. An example is shown below, where the value214
is returned instead of-42
. It appears the reason is that the generated testbench code does not attach thesigned
attribute to signed signals. However, this only ends up impactingget_value
, notexpect
.test.py
dut.sv
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: