The following prior applications are herein incorporated by reference in their entirety for all purposes:
U.S. Pat. No. 9,100,232, filed Feb. 2, 2015 as application Ser. No. 14/612,241 and issued Aug. 4, 2015, naming Amin Shokrollahi, Ali Hormati, and Roger Ulrich, entitled “Method and Apparatus for Low Power Chip-to-Chip Communications with Constrained ISI Ratio”, hereinafter identified as [Shokrollahi].
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/926,958, filed Oct. 29, 2015, naming Richard Simpson, Andrew Stewart, and Ali Hormati, entitled “Clock Data Alignment System for Vector Signaling Code Communications Link”, hereinafter identified as [Simpson].
The following additional references to prior art have been cited in this application:
“A 3×9 Gb/s Shared, All-Digital CDR for High-Speed, High-Density I/O”, Matthew Loh, Azita Emami-Neyestanak, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, Vo. 47, No. 3, March 2012, hereinafter identified as [Loh].
It is common for communications receivers to extract a receive clock signal from the received data stream. Some communications protocols facilitate such Clock Data Recovery or CDR operation by constraining the communications signaling so as to distinguish between clock-related and data-related signal components. Similarly, some communications receivers process the received signals beyond the minimum necessary to detect data, so as to provide the additional information to facilitate clock recovery. As one example, a so-called double-baud-rate receive sampler may measure received signal levels at twice the expected data reception rate, to allow independent detection of the received signal level corresponding to the data component, and the chronologically offset received signal transition related to the signal clock component.
However, the introduction of extraneous communications protocol transitions is known to limit achievable data communication rate. Similarly, receive sampling at higher than transmitted data rate is known to substantially increase receiver power utilization.
Data-dependent receive equalization is also well known in the art. Generally, these time-domain-oriented equalization methods focus on compensating for the effects of inter-symbol-interference or ISI on the received signal. Such ISI is caused by the residual electrical effects of a previously transmitted signal persisting in the communications transmission medium, so as to affect the amplitude or timing of the current symbol interval. As one example, a transmission line medium having one or more impedance anomalies may introduce signal reflections. Thus, a transmitted signal will propagate over the medium and be partially reflected by one or more such anomalies, with such reflections appearing at the receiver at a later time in superposition with signals propagating directly.
One method of data-dependent receive equalization is Decision Feedback Equalization or DFE. Here, the time-domain oriented equalization is performed by maintaining a history of previously-received data values at the receiver, which are processed by a transmission line model to predict the expected influence that each of the historical data values would have on the present receive signal. Such a transmission line model may be precalculated, derived by measurement, or generated heuristically, and may encompass the effects of one or more than one previous data interval. The predicted influence of these one or more previous data intervals is collectively called the DFE compensation. At low to moderate data rates, the DFE compensation may be calculated in time to be applied before the next data sample is detected, as example by being explicitly subtracted from the received data signal prior to receive sampling, or implicitly subtracted by modifying the reference level to which the received data signal is compared in the receive data sampler or comparator. However, at higher data rates the detection of previous data bits and computation of the DFE compensation may not be complete in time for the next data sample, requiring use of so-called “unrolled” DFE computations performed on speculative or potential data values rather than known previous data values. As one example, an unrolled DFE stage may predict two different compensation values depending on whether the determining data bit will resolve to a one or a zero, with the receive detector performing sampling or slicing operations based on each of those predictions, the multiple results being maintained until the DFE decision is resolved.
Methods and systems are described for generating two comparator outputs by comparing a received signal to a first threshold and a second threshold according to a sampling clock, the first and second thresholds determined by an estimated amount of inter-symbol interference on a multi-wire bus, selecting one of the two comparator outputs as a data decision, the selection based on at least one prior data decision, and selecting one of the two comparator outputs as a phase-error decision, the phase error decision selected in response to identification of a predetermined data decision pattern.
In recent years, the signaling rate of high speed communications systems have reached speeds of tens of gigabits per second, with individual data unit intervals measured in picoseconds. One example of such a system is given by [Shokrollahi].
Conventional practice for a high-speed integrated circuit receiver have each data line to terminate (after any relevant front end processing such as amplification and frequency equalization) in a sampling device. This sampling device performs a measurement constrained in both time and amplitude dimensions; in one example embodiment, it may be composed of a sample-and-hold circuit that constrains the time interval being measured, followed by a threshold detector or digital comparator that determines whether the signal within that interval falls above or below (or in some embodiments, within bounds set by) a reference value. Alternatively, a digital comparator may determine the signal amplitude followed by a clocked digital flip-flop capturing the result at a selected time. In other embodiments, a combined time- and amplitude-sampling circuit is used, sampling the amplitude state of its input in response to a clock transition.
Subsequently, this document will use the term sampling device, or more simply “sampler” to describe this receiver component that generates the input measurement, as it implies both the time and amplitude measurement constraints, rather than the equivalent but less descriptive term “slicer” also used in the art. The well-known receiver “eye plot” graphically illustrates input signal values that will or will not provide accurate and reliable detected results from such measurement, and thus the allowable boundaries of the time- and amplitude-measurement windows imposed on the sampler.
Clock Data Recovery
So-called Clock Data Recovery or CDR circuits as in [Simpson] support such sampling measurements by extracting timing information, either from the data lines themselves or from dedicated clock signal inputs, and utilizing that extracted information to generate clock signals to control the time interval used by the data line sampling device(s). The actual clock extraction may be performed using well known circuits such as a Phase Locked Loop (PLL) or Delay Locked Loop (DLL), which in their operation may also generate higher frequency internal clocks, multiple clock phases, etc. in support of receiver operation.
As there may be unavoidable timing skews between signal lines and the recovered clock, it is common practice to incorporate secondary data line sampling circuits which may be intentionally offset by controlled amounts of time and/or amplitude, so as to determine the received data eye edges and thus discern whether the data sample timing or threshold level is optimally configured. One example of such art is given by [Loh]. Unfortunately, the addition of such secondary sampling circuits to multiple high-speed data inputs corresponds to a significant increase in integrated circuit real estate, and well as producing a substantial increase in power consumption.
Decision Feedback Equalization
It has become common practice for data communications receivers to incorporate Decision Feedback Equalization (DFE) to compensate for signal propagation anomalies in the communications medium. The DFE system performs time-domain oriented equalization on the received signal by maintaining a history of previously-received data values at the receiver, and processing those historic data values with a transmission line model to predict the expected influence each of the historical data values would have on the present receive signal. Such a transmission line model may be pre-calculated, derived by measurement, or generated heuristically, and may encompass the effects of one or more than one previous data interval. The predicted influence of these one or more previous data intervals is collectively called the DFE compensation, which is subsequently applied to the received signal to facilitate the current unit interval's detection. For purposes of explanation, this computation may be simply described as comprising multiplication of each previous unit interval's data value by a predetermined scaling factor, and then summation of each of these scaled results representing the effects of successive previous unit intervals to produce a composite DFE compensation value representing the cumulative predicted effect of all such previous unit intervals.
In a typical receiver design, this DFE compensation value will be subtracted from the current receive signal input, to produce a corrected signal more accurately representing the received data value. Such subtraction may be performed, as one example, by applying the received signal and the DFE compensation value to the inputs of a differential amplification circuit. In one common embodiment, this differential circuit represents the input of a digital comparator or a combined time- and amplitude-sampler, the output of which represents the detected data value relative to a particular threshold signal level.
Those familiar with the art will recognize that the DFE compensation value produced as described above cannot be calculated until the previous unit interval's data value has been detected. Thus, as data rates increase, a point will be reached at which the information to produce the DFE compensation value is not available in time to be applied to the next unit interval sampling. Indeed, at the highest data rates currently used in practice, this situation may exist for multiple previous unit intervals, as the detection time for a single data value may represent multiple unit interval durations, requiring the receiver to pipeline or parallelize the detection operation. Thus, it is common for embodiments to forgo such “closed loop” DFE methods for one or more of the most recent unit intervals, instead relying on an “open loop” or “unrolled loop” generation of one or more elements of the DFE compensation value for these most recent unit intervals.
In an effort to accelerate such DFE operation, some embodiments speculatively produce DFE compensation values corresponding to each of the possible detected data values for a given unit interval. In one example embodiment of this type, pairs of DFE compensation values are produced for three consecutive unit intervals corresponding to their possible binary data values, thus resulting in eight possible combined DFE compensation values for these three preceding unit intervals.
At least one embodiment extends this DFE unrolling behavior by incorporating multiple data detection samplers; each sampler provided with a distinct value of DFE compensation associated with the possible detected data value for one or more previous unit intervals. In such an embodiment, selection of which of the speculative DFE compensation values should be used may be postponed until after the current unit interval data detection, by storing the results of the various comparator outputs (which are dependent on different speculative DFE compensation values) and then later selecting which stored output is to be used for data detection. Although this late-decision DFE approach provides a significant increase in the amount of time available for data detection, it has an impact on receiver complexity. Moreover, the power utilization associated with the multiple samplers operating at high speeds may significantly increase receiver power use.
The set of DFE compensation values speculatively created to represent the constellation of potential detected data results over the previous transmit unit interval or intervals represent a set of measurement levels spanning some portion of the receive signal amplitude range. As an example, previous transmission of consecutive “zero” signals might lead to a predicted lower threshold level for a subsequent receiver data measurement incorporating speculative DFE compensation, while previous transmission of consecutive “one” signals might lead to a predicted higher threshold level for the same data measurement. Thus, for any data measurement used to detect an actual data value, the described multiple-sampler receiver will potentially perform measurement operations using thresholds either too high or too low for the actual signal during that interval. In some embodiments, these measurement operations from the samplers or comparators performing such speculative operations not directly associated with the actual data detection, although not used for determining the received data value, may nonetheless be used to obtain new information relating to clock recovery, thus mitigating the additional receiver power and complexity those devices add to the receiver.
Example Embodiment
For purposes of description and without implying limitation, a simple serial data receiver as shown in
In some embodiments, an apparatus includes two comparators 120 configured to generate two comparator outputs, the two comparators configured to compare a received signal to a first threshold and a second threshold according to a sampling clock, the first and second thresholds determined by an estimated amount of inter-symbol interference on a multi-wire bus. The apparatus may further include a data decision selection circuit 130 configured to select one of the two comparator outputs as a data decision, the selection based on at least one prior data decision that may be stored in data value history 140. The apparatus further includes a phase-error decision selection circuit 160 configured to select one of the two comparator outputs as a phase-error decision in response to receiving a CDR selection signal from a pattern detection circuit 150 configured to identify a predetermined data decision pattern in the data value history storage 140.
In some embodiments, the apparatus further includes a receiver clock system 170 configured to receive the phase-error decision and to responsively adjust a phase of the sampling clock. In some embodiments, the phase-error decision is an early/late logic decision on a transition of the received signal. In some embodiments, the data decision selection circuit 130 and phase-error decision circuit 160 select different comparator outputs.
In some embodiments, the apparatus further includes a decision-feedback equalization (DFE) circuit 135 configured to generate the first and second thresholds.
In some embodiments, the apparatus further includes a sub-channel detection multi-input comparator (MIC, not shown) operating on signals received via a plurality of wires, the sub-channel detection MIC configured to generate the received data input signal. In such embodiments, the signals received via the plurality of wires correspond to symbols of a codeword of a vector signaling code, the codeword corresponding to a weighted summation of a plurality of sub-channel vectors, each sub-channel vector mutually orthogonal. In such an embodiment, the inter-symbol interference is sub-channel specific, the sub-channel specific ISI corresponding to modulation of components of a corresponding sub-channel vector associated with the received signal. In some embodiments, sub-channel specific ISI associated with each sub-channel vector is mutually orthogonal. In some embodiments, the apparatus may further include a filter configured to filter the received signal prior to generating the comparator outputs.
In
The upper DFE sampler location selected by a DFE system to detect the current data value if the previous data value was “1” is shown with the symbol +. It may be noted that this sampler location is well positioned in the center of the upper data eye, but also is directly over the trajectory of a [0,1,1] and [0, 1, 0] received signal (the current data value of which will be detected by the lower sampler location, as determined by the previous data value of “0”.) Thus, this + sampler result, unneeded for data detection of the [0,1,1] signal, may be utilized by the CDR system to determine whether the sampler timing is early or late relative to that signal transition.
In some embodiments, the signals shown in
Optimizing the Signal Waveform
It may be seen in
Continuing this example,
The useful data sampler results are graphically annotated using the symbols *, ◯, and •, with * representing a data sampler result used to obtain a data value, and • representing an unneeded data sampler result which may be ignored (i.e. the DFE predicted compensation value not corresponding to the actual data value subsequently detected. It may easily be observed that in this example the DFE system may steer selection of the current unit interval's data sampler result based on the state of the previous unit interval data value, with the current unit interval's result obtained from the upper sampler if the previous unit interval data was “1”, and from the lower sampler if the previous unit interval data was “0”.
The sampler results illustrated by the symbol ◯ represent the interesting case where the “unneeded” result is obtained at a signal amplitude and time during which the input signal is transitioning, i.e. a signal edge. The CDR system can use these results to determine whether the sampling clock it generates is early (thus, capturing the state of the input signal before its expected transition) or late (similarly, capturing the state of the input signal after its expected transition) and as a result make an appropriate clock phase adjustment.
Unlike known CDR systems such as [Loh I], the same samplers are used for data detection and clock edge detection. Also differing from known art, clock and data sampling are performed using the same sampler clock timing, rather than requiring use of an offset edge-sampling clock for edge detection and an eye-center clock for data detection.
Further examination of
Thus, returning to the example embodiment of
As previously described, the sampled result not selected to obtain a data value may under some conditions be used to observe a received data input transition. Pattern detection circuit 150 is triggered when those conditions are found in the sequence of data values stored in data value history 140, selecting a sampled data value using a phase-error decision selection circuit to be used as a CDR phase correction to receiver clock system 170. Shaping of the analog signal characteristics of the received data input being sampled maximizes the opportunities to utilize the sampled results for clock phase correction. The frequency-dependent filtering provided by CTLE 110 provides the necessary signal shaping in this example.
In some embodiments, the method further includes adjusting a phase of the sampling clock according to the phase-error decision. In some embodiments, the phase-error decision is an early/late logic decision on a transition of the received signal. In some embodiments, the data decision and phase-error decision correspond to different comparator outputs. In some embodiments, the method further includes generating the first and second thresholds using a decision-feedback equalization (DFE) circuit 135.
In some embodiments, the method further includes generating the received signal using a sub-channel detection multi-input comparator (MIC) operating on signals received via a plurality of wires. In some embodiments, the signals received via the plurality of wires correspond to symbols of a codeword of a vector signaling code, the codeword corresponding to a weighted summation of a plurality of sub-channel vectors, each sub-channel vector mutually orthogonal. In some embodiments, the inter-symbol interference is sub-channel specific, the sub-channel specific ISI corresponding to modulation of components of a corresponding sub-channel vector associated with the received signal. In some embodiments, sub-channel specific ISI associated with each sub-channel vector is mutually orthogonal. In some embodiments, the method further includes filtering the received signal prior to generating the comparator outputs.
As described in [Shokrollahi], an exemplary encoding scheme for above-described codewords is given below:
Each codeword may be generated by multiplying a row vector of information bits S by an orthogonal matrix A:
and S=a row vector of information bits [0, S0, S1, S2, S3, S4] representing antipodal weights (e.g., ±1 for logic bits 0, 1, or alternatively ±⅓), and w is the codeword vector of symbols to be transmitted [w0, w1, w2, w3, w4, w5]. As shown, each row in matrix A corresponds to a sub-channel vector, and each sub-channel vector is (i) mutually orthogonal and (ii) orthogonal to the common-mode row of all ones. In such embodiments, the common-mode row of all 1's may be unused, and rows 2-6 are each modulated by a corresponding information bit S0-S4 to transmit 5 bits over 6 wires.
A third embodiment of a signaling design also utilizes linear coding and is called Ensemble-NRZ or ENRZ. ENRZ has 8 codewords of the form ±perm (1, −⅓, −⅓, −⅓) where “perm” means all the permutations of the coefficients, and 3 MICs of the form (½, −½, ½, −½), (½, ½, −½, −½) and (½, −½, −½, ½), and can send 3 bits over 4 wires per unit interval. The coding matrix is a scaled version of the 4×4-Hadamard matrix:
The scale factor ⅓ is chosen so that the final values are constrained to be between −1 and 1. The throughput is 6 Gbps/wire.
DFE embodiments are known that perform more complex analysis based on a larger history of previous data values to determine the correct sampler result, so such embodiments may similarly utilize more complex historical data value sequences when selecting sampler results useful for CDR adjustment, thus no limitation should be inferred from the simplified descriptive examples herein. Similarly, embodiments incorporating differently configured signal filtration (i.e. producing as a result different delay relationships for different signal trajectories and sampling point locations) may utilize different historical data value sequences when selecting such desirable sampler results. It may also be noted that the naming of the data value triplets as [last data, current data, next data] is arbitrary and chosen for descriptive simplicity, with no limitation implied; in an embodiment which maintains a historical record of received data values as described herein, such a sequence may be equally well comprised of any set of sequential historical values, such as [historically penultimate data value, historically last data value, current data value], etc. Indeed, in at least one embodiment, the sequence of data values used in sampler selection, the stored sampler value selected for data detection, and the stored sampler value selected as relevant to updating of the CDR phase, all represent receive unit intervals previous to the present time.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 17/517,042, filed Nov. 2, 2021, entitled “Clock Data Recovery with Decision Feedback Equalization”, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 17/028,834, filed Sep. 22, 2020, now U.S. Pat. No. 11,165,611, granted Nov. 2, 2021, entitled “Clock Data Recovery with Decision Feedback Equalization”, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 16/261,502, filed Jan. 29, 2019, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,785,072, granted Sep. 22, 2002, entitled “Clock Data Recovery with Decision Feedback Equalization”, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 15/582,545, filed Apr. 28, 2017, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,193,716, granted Jan. 29, 0219, entitled “Clock Data Recovery with Decision Feedback Equalization”, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/328,716, filed Apr. 28, 2016, entitled “Clock Data Recovery Utilizing Decision Feedback Compensation”, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety for all purposes.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3992616 | Acker | Nov 1976 | A |
4839907 | Saneski | Jun 1989 | A |
5266907 | Dacus | Nov 1993 | A |
5302920 | Bitting | Apr 1994 | A |
5528198 | Baba et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5565817 | Lakshmikumar | Oct 1996 | A |
5602884 | Wieczorkiewicz et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5629651 | Mizuno | May 1997 | A |
5802356 | Gaskins et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
6002717 | Gaudet | Dec 1999 | A |
6026134 | Duffy et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6037812 | Gaudet | Mar 2000 | A |
6122336 | Anderson | Sep 2000 | A |
6307906 | Tanji et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6316987 | Dally et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6380783 | Chao et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6389091 | Yamaguchi et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6426660 | Ho et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6507544 | Ma et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6509773 | Buchwald et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6633621 | Bishop et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6650699 | Tierno | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6717478 | Kim et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6838951 | Nieri et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6917762 | Kim | Jul 2005 | B2 |
7078978 | Wakii | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7102449 | Mohan | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7158441 | Okamura | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7199728 | Dally et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7336112 | Sha et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7339990 | Hidaka | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7532697 | Sidiropoulos et al. | May 2009 | B1 |
7535957 | Ozawa et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7616075 | Kushiyama | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7650525 | Chang et al. | Jan 2010 | B1 |
7688929 | Co | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7697647 | McShea | Apr 2010 | B1 |
7822113 | Tonietto et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7839229 | Nakamura et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7852109 | Chan et al. | Dec 2010 | B1 |
7860190 | Feller | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7869497 | Benvenuto et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7873115 | Zerbe et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
8036300 | Evans et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8253454 | Lin | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8407511 | Mobin et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8472513 | Malipatil et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8583072 | Ciubotaru et al. | Nov 2013 | B1 |
8649476 | Malipatil et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8791735 | Shibasaki | Jul 2014 | B1 |
8861583 | Liu | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8929496 | Lee et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8934594 | Malhotra | Jan 2015 | B1 |
9036764 | Hossain et al. | May 2015 | B1 |
9059816 | Simpson et al. | Jun 2015 | B1 |
9083576 | Hormati | Jul 2015 | B1 |
9100232 | Hormati et al. | Aug 2015 | B1 |
9106462 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2015 | B1 |
9306621 | Zhang et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9374250 | Musah et al. | Jun 2016 | B1 |
9397868 | Hossain et al. | Jul 2016 | B1 |
9438409 | Liao et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
9520883 | Shibasaki | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9565036 | Zerbe et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9571309 | Sakai | Feb 2017 | B1 |
9577815 | Simpson et al. | Feb 2017 | B1 |
9602111 | Shen et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9705708 | Jin et al. | Jul 2017 | B1 |
9906358 | Tajalli | Feb 2018 | B1 |
9960902 | Lin et al. | May 2018 | B1 |
10055372 | Shokrollahi | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10326435 | Arp et al. | Jun 2019 | B2 |
10326623 | Tajalli | Jun 2019 | B1 |
10574487 | Hormati | Feb 2020 | B1 |
10848351 | Hormati | Nov 2020 | B2 |
11070349 | Joo | Jul 2021 | B1 |
11165611 | Hormati et al. | Nov 2021 | B2 |
20030001557 | Pisipaty | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030146783 | Bandy et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030212930 | Aung et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030214977 | Kuo | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040092240 | Hayashi | May 2004 | A1 |
20040141567 | Yang et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050024117 | Kubo et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050078712 | Voutilainen | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050084050 | Cheung et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050117404 | Savoj | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050128018 | Meltzer | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050141662 | Sano et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050201491 | Wei | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050220182 | Kuwata | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050275470 | Choi | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060008041 | Kim et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060062058 | Lin | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060140324 | Casper et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060232461 | Felder | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060233291 | Garlepp et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060256892 | Momtaz | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070001713 | Lin | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070001723 | Lin | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070047689 | Menolfi et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070058768 | Werner | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070086267 | Kwak | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070127612 | Lee et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070146088 | Arai et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070147559 | Lapointe | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070183552 | Sanders et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070201597 | He et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070253475 | Palmer | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080007367 | Kim | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080069198 | Bhoja et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080111634 | Min | May 2008 | A1 |
20080136479 | You et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080165841 | Wall et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080181289 | Moll | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080219399 | Nary | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080317188 | Staszewski et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090103675 | Yousefi et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090167389 | Reis | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090195281 | Tamura et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090224860 | Fagg | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090231006 | Jang et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090243679 | Smith et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090262876 | Arima et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090262877 | Shi et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100020862 | Peng | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100033259 | Miyashita | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100090723 | Nedovic et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100090735 | Cho | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100156543 | Dubey | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100180143 | Ware et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100220828 | Fuller et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110002181 | Wang et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110025392 | Wu et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110148498 | Mosalikanti et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110234278 | Seo | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110286497 | Nervig | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110286511 | Zeng et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110311008 | Slezak et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120051480 | Usugi et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120082203 | Zerbe et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120170621 | Tracy et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120200364 | Iizuka et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120206177 | Colinet et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120213267 | Stojanovic et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120224621 | Stojanovic et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120235717 | Hirai et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120327993 | Palmer | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130088274 | Gu | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130091392 | Valliappan et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130093471 | Cho et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130107997 | Chen | May 2013 | A1 |
20130108001 | Chang et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130202065 | Chmelar | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130207706 | Yanagisawa | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130243127 | Ito et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130271194 | Madoglio et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130285720 | Jibry | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130287088 | Mobin et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130314142 | Tamura et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130322512 | Francese et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140169426 | Aziz et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140177699 | Tan et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140286381 | Shibasaki | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140286457 | Chaivipas | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20150043627 | Kang et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150078495 | Hossain et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150117579 | Shibasaki | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150180642 | Hsieh et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150220472 | Sengoku | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150256326 | Simpson et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150319015 | Malhotra | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20160056980 | Wang et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160087610 | Hata | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160134267 | Adachi | May 2016 | A1 |
20160261435 | Musah et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20170005785 | Aleksic et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170005841 | Komori | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170019276 | Francese | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170228215 | Chatwin et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170310456 | Tajalli | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170373889 | Sakai | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180083763 | Black et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180219539 | Arp et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180227114 | Rahman et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180343011 | Tajalli et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20180351769 | Tajalli et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20180375693 | Zhou et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20190109735 | Norimatsu | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20190199557 | Taylor et al. | Jun 2019 | A1 |
20190377378 | Gharibdoust | Dec 2019 | A1 |
20200162233 | Lee et al. | May 2020 | A1 |
20210248103 | Khashaba et al. | Aug 2021 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
203675093 | Jun 2014 | CN |
0740423 | Oct 1996 | EP |
3615692 | Nov 2004 | JP |
0340178 | Jun 2002 | KR |
Entry |
---|
Chang, Hong-Yeh , et al., “A Low-Jitter Low-Phase-Noise 10-GHz Sub-Harmonically Injection-Locked PLL With Self-Aligned DLL in 65-nm CMOS Technology”, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol. 62, No. 3, Mar. 2014, 543-555 (13 pages). |
Cui, Delong , et al., “A Dual-Channel 23-Gbps CMOS Transmitter/Receiver Chipset for 40-Gbps RZ-DQPSK and CS-RZ-DQPSK Optical Transmission”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 47, No. 12, Dec. 2012, 3249-3260 (12 pages). |
Ha, J.C. , et al., “Unified All-Digital Duty-Cycle and phase correction circuit for QDR I/O interface”, Electronic Letters, The Institution of Engineering and Technology, vol. 44, No. 22, Oct. 23, 2008, 1300-1301 (2 pages). |
Hidaka, Yasuo , et al., “A 4-Channel 1.25-10.3 Gb/s Backplane Transceiver Macro With 35 dB Equalizer and Sign-Based Zero-Forcing Adaptive Control”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 44, No. 12, Dec. 2009, 3547-3559 (13 pages). |
Holden, Brian , “An exploration of the technical feasibility of the major technology options for 400GE backplanes”, IEEE 802.3 400GE Study Group, Geneva, CH, Jul. 16, 2013, 1-18 (18 pages). |
Inti, Rajesh , et al., “A 0.5-to-2.5 Gb/s Reference-Less Half-Rate Digital CDR with Unlimited Frequency Acquisition Range and Improved Input Duty-Cycle Error Tolerance”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 46, No. 12, Dec. 2011, 3150-3162 (13 pages). |
Loh, Mattew , et al., “A 3×9 Gb/s Shared, All-Digital CDR for High-Speed, High-Density I/O”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 47, No. 3, Mar. 2012, 641-651 (11 pages). |
Nandwana, Romesh Kumar, et al., “A Calibration-Free Fractional-N Ring PLL Using Hybrid Phase/Current-Mode Phase Interpolation Method”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 50, No. 4, Apr. 2015, 882-895 (14 pages). |
Navid, Reza , et al., “A 40 Gb/s Serial Link Transceiver in 28 nm CMOS Technology”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 50, No. 4, Apr. 2015, 814-827 (14 pages). |
Ng, Herman Jalli, et al., “Low Phase Noise 77-GHz Fractional-N PLL with DLL-based Reference Frequency Multiplier for FMCW Radars”, European Microwave Integrated Circuits Conference, Oct. 10-11, 2011, 196-199 (4 pages). |
Pozzoni, Massimo , et al., “A Multi-Standard 1.5 to 10 Gb/s Latch-Based 3-Tap DFE Receiver with a SSC Tolerant CDR for Serial Backplane Communication”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 44, No. 4, Apr. 2009, 1306-1315 (10 pages). |
Rau, M , et al., “Clock/Data Recovery PLL Using Half-Frequency Clock”, Phase-Locking in High-Performance Systems: From Devices to Architectures, 2003, 643-646 (4 pages). |
Riley, M. W. , et al., “Cell Broadband Engine Processor: Design and Implementation”, IBM Journal of Research and Development, vol. 51, No. 5, Sep. 2007, 545-557 (13 pages). |
Ryu, Kyungho , et al., “Process-Variation-Calibrated Multiphase Delay Locked Loop With a Loop-Enbedded Duty Cycle Corrector”, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, vol. 61, No. 1, Jan. 2014, 1-5 (5 pages). |
Shibasaki, Takayuki , et al., “A 56-Gb/s Receiver Front-End with a CTLE and 1-Tap DFE in 20-nm CMOS”, IEEE 2014 Symposium on VLSI Circuits Digest of Technical Papers, 2014, (2 pages). |
Shu, Guanghua, et al., “A 4-to-10.5 Gb/s Continuous-Rate Digital Clock and Data Recovery With Automatic Frequency Acquisition”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 51, No. 2, Feb. 2016, 428-439 (12 pages). |
Tajalli, Armin , “Wideband PLL Using Matrix Phase Comparator”, Journal of Latex Class Files, vol. 14, No. 8, Aug. 2016, 1-8 (8 pages). |
Tan, Han-Yuan , “Design of Noise-Robust Clock and Data Recovery Using an Adaptive-Bandwidth Mixed PLL/DLL”, Harvard University Thesis, Nov. 2006, 1-169 (169 pages). |
Wang, Yi-Ming , et al., “Range Unlimited Delay-Interleaving and -Recycling Clock Skew Compensation and Duty-Cycle Correction Circuit”, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, vol. 23, No. 5, May 2015, 856-868 (13 pages). |
Won, Hyosup , et al., “A 28-Gb/s Receiver With Self-contained Adaptive Equalization and Sampling Point Control Using Stochastic Sigma-Tracking Eye-Opening Monitor”, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems-I: Regular Papers, vol. 64, No. 3, Mar. 2017, 664-674 (11 pages). |
Yoo, Danny , et al., “A 36-Gb/s Adaptive Baud-Rate CDR with CTLE and 1-Tap DFE in 28-nm CMOS”, IEEE Solid-State Circuits Letters, vol. 2, No. 11, Nov. 2019, 252-255 (4 pages). |
Zaki, Ahmed M., “Adaptive Clock and Data Recovery for Asymmetric Triangular Frequency Modulation Profile”, IEEE Pacific Rim Conference on Communications, Computers and Signal Processing (PACRIM), Aug. 21, 2019, 1-6 (6 pages). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20230318887 A1 | Oct 2023 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62328716 | Apr 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 17517042 | Nov 2021 | US |
Child | 18330187 | US | |
Parent | 17028834 | Sep 2020 | US |
Child | 17517042 | US | |
Parent | 16261502 | Jan 2019 | US |
Child | 17028834 | US | |
Parent | 15582545 | Apr 2017 | US |
Child | 16261502 | US |