A Comparison of Dual Modular Redundancy and Concurrent Error Detection in Finite Impulse Response Filters Implemented in SRAM-Based FPGAs Through Fault Injection

Compared with application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), static random access memory (SRAM)-based field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) respond differently to radiation due to the configuration memory vulnerability. In this brief, the differences between the permanent error model for SRAM-based FPGAs due to configuration memory single event upsets (SEUs), and the ASIC SEU error model are put into perspective for error detection schemes. In particular, a concurrent error detection (CED) technique for finite impulse response filters in ASICs is implemented and evaluated in an SRAM-based FPGA through fault injection emulation. This method is compared with a dual modular redundancy (DMR) scheme in order to obtain a common behavior. The analysis of experimental data indicates that the CED technique has less undetected errors than DMR. However, our exhaustive fault injection tests reveal that false positive detections are more likely to occur in CED, since the error detection branch uses more FPGA resources than the DMR comparator. This phenomenon, which is negligible in ASICs, implies a partial or complete unnecessary reconfiguration, so it should be considered in SRAM-based FPGAs.

[1]  Sergio D'Angelo,et al.  Evaluation of Single Event Upset Mitigation Schemes for SRAM based FPGAs using the FLIPPER Fault Injection Platform , 2007, 22nd IEEE International Symposium on Defect and Fault-Tolerance in VLSI Systems (DFT 2007).

[2]  J. Teifel,et al.  Self-Voting Dual-Modular-Redundancy Circuits for Single-Event-Transient Mitigation , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[3]  Pedro Reviriego,et al.  Structural DMR: A Technique for Implementation of Soft-Error-Tolerant FIR Filters , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs.

[4]  Heather Quinn,et al.  A Method and Case Study on Identifying Physically Adjacent Multiple-Cell Upsets Using 28-nm, Interleaved and SECDED-Protected Arrays , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[5]  Norbert Wehn,et al.  Reliable on-chip systems in the nano-era: Lessons learnt and future trends , 2013, 2013 50th ACM/EDAC/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC).

[6]  Pedro Reviriego,et al.  Implementing Concurrent Error Detection in Infinite-Impulse-Response Filters , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs.

[7]  Salvatore Pontarelli,et al.  Totally Fault Tolerant RNS Based FIR Filters , 2008, 2008 14th IEEE International On-Line Testing Symposium.

[8]  M. Wirthlin,et al.  SEU-induced persistent error propagation in FPGAs , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[9]  A.K. Deb,et al.  Bridging concurrent and non-concurrent error detection in FIR filters , 2004, Proceedings Norchip Conference, 2004..

[10]  R.C. Baumann,et al.  Radiation-induced soft errors in advanced semiconductor technologies , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Device and Materials Reliability.

[11]  Ernest L. Hall,et al.  Introduction to Digital Filters, by T. J. Terrell , 1981 .

[12]  J. McCollum,et al.  Speers 0 . 25 μ m FLASH Memory Based FPGA for Space Applications , 1999 .

[13]  Mehdi B. Tahoori,et al.  An Analytical Approach for Soft Error Rate Estimation of SRAM-Based FPGAs , 2004 .

[14]  Trevor J. Terrell.  Introduction to Digital Filters , 1980 .

[15]  Jing Wang,et al.  Fault missing rate analysis of the arithmetic residue codes based fault-tolerant FIR filter design , 2012, 2012 IEEE 18th International On-Line Testing Symposium (IOLTS).

[16]  Wang Jing,et al.  Efficient single event upset-tolerant FIR filter design based on residue number for OBP satellite communication systems , 2013, China Communications.

[17]  D. Bortolato,et al.  Errata to “Identification and Classification of Single-Event Upsets in the Configuration Memory of SRAM-Based FPGAs” , 2003 .