The present invention relates generally to the field of static timing analysis of integrated circuit design, and more particularly, relates to a method, system, and computer program product for implementing timing pessimism reduction for parallel clock trees.
A static timing tool typically is used to automatically analyze the timing of an integrated circuit design to ensure that circuits meet critical timing constraints. EinsTimer, a commercially available static timing tool by International Business Machines Corporation, of Armonk, N.Y., performs static timing analysis on an integrated circuit design.
In some Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) designs, clock trees are built such that synchronous clocks have parallel clock trees. This might happen when a divided clock is used. For example, some latches in the design may be clocked at 500 MHz and some at 250 MHz with the 250 MHz clock being created from the 500 MHz using a clock divider at the base of the clock trees.
When using this sort of parallel clock tree structure, logic paths that cross from one of the clock trees to the other clock tree can suffer from significant variation penalties due to the large number of clock gates that are not common between the latches involved. Timing pessimism results when considering delay variation along common segments of clock paths.
If these parallel clock trees are built with similar layouts using gates at each level of the tree that are placed near each other, then it is known that some of the variation penalty can be reduced. This reduction comes from the fact that gates far away from each other on a chip die typically have more process variation than gates that are near each other.
Tools exist, such as EinsTimer, to reduce timing pessimism by taking advantage of this reduction in variation due to proximity. However, these tools require all gates, which are not common between source and sink latch to be inside a bounding box. In conventional topology, individual pairs of gates would fit inside a bounding box, but the complete topology does not fit inside the bounding box.
A need exists for an efficient and effective method to reduce timing pessimism for parallel clock trees.
Principal aspects of the present invention are to provide a method, system, and computer program product for implementing timing pessimism reduction for parallel clock trees. Other important aspects of the present invention are to provide such method, system, and computer program product substantially without negative effect and that overcome some of the disadvantages of prior art arrangements.
In brief, a computer-implemented method, system, and computer program product are provided for implementing timing pessimism reduction for parallel clock trees. A common path tracing algorithm in a static timing tool is enhanced by a parallel path proximity credit algorithm to include a proximity credit used for pairs of gates in two clock trees that are placed in close proximity to each other. The proximity credit given is equal to a predefined fraction of a proximity component of a gate delay.
In accordance with features of the invention, the parallel path proximity credit algorithm begins by tracing back from clock and data test points to a clock starting point. After finding the clock starting point, the parallel path proximity credit algorithm traces forward for both paths to find the point where the paths diverge. The parallel path proximity credit algorithm then traces forward to the next gate in each path. If the gates are not in close proximity, the algorithm ends. If these gates are in close proximity, then the proximity credit is given. The proximity check then moves on to the next pair of gates in the path and repeats if they are in close proximity to each other.
The present invention together with the above and other objects and advantages may best be understood from the following detailed description of the preferred embodiments of the invention illustrated in the drawings, wherein:
In the following detailed description of embodiments of the invention, reference is made to the accompanying drawings, which illustrate example embodiments by which the invention may be practiced. It is to be understood that other embodiments may be utilized and structural changes may be made without departing from the scope of the invention.
The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention. As used herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended to include the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “comprises” and/or “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify the presence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, and/or groups thereof.
In accordance with features of the invention, a method is provided for implementing timing pessimism reduction for parallel clock trees. A parallel path proximity credit algorithm is provided to enhance a common path pessimism removal algorithm using a proximity credit for proximately placed pairs of gates in two clock trees.
Referring now to the drawings, in
Computer system 100 is shown in simplified form sufficient for understanding the present invention. The illustrated computer system 100 is not intended to imply architectural or functional limitations. The present invention can be used with various hardware implementations and systems and various other internal hardware devices, for example, multiple main processors.
As shown in
Various commercially available computers can be used for computer system 100. CPU 102 is suitably programmed by the parallel path proximity credit algorithm or program 138 to execute the flowchart of
Referring to
Having reference to
Referring now to
If determined that the paths trace to a common path, then the parallel path proximity credit algorithm 138 traces forward to a diverging point as indicated at a block 406. As indicated at a decision block 408, checking is performed to determine if the end of the path is reached. If the end of the path is reached, then the parallel path proximity credit algorithm 138 ends as indicated at a block 410.
If the end of the path is not reached, then checking is performed to determine if the next gates are in close proximity as indicated at a decision block 412. If the next gates are not in close proximity, then the parallel path proximity credit algorithm 138 ends as indicated at a block 414. Otherwise when the next gates are in close proximity, then a proximity credit is applied, and the parallel path proximity credit algorithm 138 traces forward as indicated at a block 416. Then the operations return to decision block 408, and are repeated as described above.
Referring now to
A sequence of program instructions or a logical assembly of one or more interrelated modules defined by the recorded program means 504, 506, 508, 510, direct the computer system 100 for implementing timing pessimism reduction for parallel clock trees of the preferred embodiment.
While the present invention has been described with reference to the details of the embodiments of the invention shown in the drawing, these details are not intended to limit the scope of the invention as claimed in the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5636372 | Hathaway et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5812835 | Ruuskanen | Sep 1998 | A |
6237127 | Craven et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6795951 | Hathaway et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
7096442 | Lu et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7117466 | Kalafala et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7143379 | Darsow et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7181711 | Foreman et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7237212 | Kucukcaker et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7243323 | Williams et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7269812 | Darsow et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7398491 | Schaeffer et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7406669 | Lindberg | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7546500 | Kapur et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7636905 | Darsow et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7694254 | Gregerson et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7765503 | Smith | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7784003 | Buck et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7797601 | Kapur et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7886247 | Fatemi et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7926019 | Ravi | Apr 2011 | B1 |
8060770 | Kuzmin et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8099702 | Hou et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8103997 | Sinha et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8108816 | Foreman et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8122404 | Sinha et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8122411 | Abbaspour et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8141014 | Foreman et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
20050066297 | Kalafala et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050183051 | Darsow et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060248485 | Foreman et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070022397 | Darsow et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070277131 | Schaeffer et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080163147 | Gregerson et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080209372 | Buck et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090222780 | Smith | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20100083205 | Ono | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100269083 | Sinha et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100318951 | Foreman et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110016442 | Abbaspour et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110035714 | Foreman et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110239173 | Ravi | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120023466 | Darsow et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120023469 | Darsow et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120023469 A1 | Jan 2012 | US |