The following prior applications are herein incorporated by reference in their entirety for all purposes:
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/582,545, filed Apr. 28, 2017, naming Ali Hormati and Richard Simpson, entitled “Clock Data Recovery with Decision Feedback Equalization”, hereinafter identified as [Hormati].
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/881,509, filed Jan. 26, 2018, naming Armin Tajalli, entitled “Dynamically Weighted Exclusive OR Gate Having Weighted Output Segments for Phase Detection and Phase Interpolation”, hereinafter identified as [Tajalli].
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 (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 limits achievable data communication rate. Similarly, receive sampling at higher than transmitted data rate substantially increases 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. In DFE, 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 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. 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 of the prior unit interval is resolved.
Methods and systems are described for obtaining a sequence of data decisions from a history buffer and an error signal, the sequence of data decisions and the error signal generated by one or more samplers operating on a received input signal according to a sampling clock, applying the sequence of data decisions and the error signal to each logic branch of a set of logic branches, and responsively selecting a logic branch from the set of logic branches, the logic branch selected responsive to (i) a detection of a transitional data pattern in the sequence of data decisions and (ii) the error signal, the selected logic branch generating an output current, and providing the output current to a local oscillator controller to adjust an input voltage of a proportional control circuit, the output current sourcing and sinking current to a capacitor through a resistive element to adjust the input voltage of the proportional control circuit relative to a voltage on the capacitor connected to the resistive element.
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. Conventional practice for a high-speed integrated circuit receiver has each data line 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.
So-called Clock Data Recovery or CDR circuits as in [Hormati] support such sampling measurements by extracting timing information, as one example from signal transitions on the data lines themselves 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.
In some embodiments, CDR involves two interrelated operations; generation of a local clock signal having a known phase relationship with the received signal, and derivation of a properly timed sampling clock from that local clock. Such indirect synchronization may occur if the receiver operates at a different rate than the received data, as one example utilizing two alternating receive processing phases, each operating at one half the receive data rate. Furthermore, the naturally locked phase relationship between the signal used as an external phase reference and the local clock may be quite different from the desired sample clock timing, relative to that same local clock, thus requiring the sampling clock to be generated with a predetermined amount of phase offset.
Typically, the steps associated with CDR include identification of suitable receive signal transitions, comparison of timing of said transitions with the local clock signal so as to produce a phase error signal, correction of the local clock signal using the phase error signal, and derivation of a properly timed sampling clock from the corrected local clock signal.
A CDR system may include a phase detector comparing the external timing reference with the local clock (e.g. the VCO output or a clock derived from the VCO output) to produce a phase error signal, a low-pass filter that smooths the phase error to produce a VCO control signal, and a voltage-controlled oscillator (VCO) producing a continuous clock oscillation at the controlled rate. In some embodiments, the VCO generates multiple clock phases to support multiple receive processing phases; in other embodiments the VCO operates at a multiple of the desired sampling rate, with digital clock dividers producing the desired lower speed clocks. In further embodiments, an adjustable phase interpolator is inserted into the phase-locked loop or one or more of its outputs, to introduce a phase offset that facilitates receive data sampling.
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 some receiver designs, 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 speculative threshold 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, such embodiments speculatively generate one or more elements of the DFE compensation value as “open loop” or “unrolled loop” operations. At least one embodiment extends this speculative DFE behavior by incorporating multiple data detection samplers; each sampler provided with a distinct speculative value of DFE compensation associated with the possible detected data value for one or more previous unit intervals. In such an embodiment, selection of one of the speculative DFE compensation values 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.
In the receiver embodiment illustrated in
The set of speculative DFE compensation values representing 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” or “low” signals might lead to a predicted lower threshold level −vh1 for a subsequent receiver data measurement incorporating speculative DFE compensation, while previous transmission of consecutive “one” or “high” signals might lead to a predicted higher threshold level +vh1 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.
Consider the processing of a receive signal in the present unit interval by processing slice 140. Under control of clock Ph180, samplers 141 and 142 capture the state of the received signal 125 relative to speculative DFE thresholds DFE3 and DFE4. When the correct data decision for the previous unit interval has been resolved by processing slice 130, the data decision may be provided to digital multiplexer 145 as a selection input to select one of the sampler results 142 or 144. Similarly, the selected data decision at the output of digital multiplexer 145 may be provided as a selection input to digital multiplexer 135.
As taught by [Hormati], under some conditions the value captured by the other sampler in phase 140 may be used to determine a phase error for the sampler clock ph180 relative to a received signal transition occurring between the previous and current unit intervals. In this example the sampler results useful for CDR may be identified by the triplet data pattern of [last data, current data, next data] results, with the transitional data pattern [1, 0, 0] indicating timing information from the speculative “low” slicer utilizing a speculative DFE correction value of −vh1, and transitional data pattern [0, 1, 1] indicating timing information from the speculative “high” slicer utilizing a speculative DFE correction value of +vh1. As seen in
As described by [Hormati], the clock error computation is complex: waiting until previous data values have been resolved, pattern-matching received data sequences, performing the actual phase comparison, and then converting the result into an analog error signal. In many scenarios, such complexity moves the error computation out of the high-speed multiphase sampler domain and into the main receiver data path. In one particular example, the half-rate data streams obtained from two processing phases are aggregated into data words accepted by the main receiver data path at one-quarter received clock rate or slower. The redundant samples used for CDR computation are similarly latched for processing in the slower clock domain, but the introduction of these queuing and interleaving elements introduces inevitable delay into the closed loop of clock generation, resulting in lower than desirable loop bandwidth and poorer clock noise immunity.
[Tajalli] describes a gate embodiment suitable for linear interpolation between two clock phases, in which the four “arms” of a typical CMOS XOR gate are individually controlled, allowing the output to have separately controlled results in each quadrant of operation, and distinct analog output levels within each quadrant output. The present embodiment expands upon that design, by incorporating multiple sets of logic branches associated with a respective transitional data pattern (e.g., [1 0 0] or [0 1 1]) providing the data-sequence gating operation used for transition detection, where each set of logic branches further combines edge comparison phase detection via respective biasing elements for providing a charge-pump output action that produces an analog error output to control the VCO.
As is well known to digital designers, implementing high fan-in CMOS logic gates by simple extension of the series- and parallel-connected transistor designs used for dual input gates can lead to slow response times and marginal output signal integrity. Strings of five series transistors are shown in
The phase comparator embodiment of
As shown in
As shown in
Similarly, the set of logic branches 310 includes a logic branch including NMOS transistors receiving control signals from NOR gates 313 and 314, as NOR gates only have one input combination providing a logic “high” that will activate the active-high NMOS transistors. When the data decision d_old+ is ‘0’, and d_now+ is ‘1’ (thus d_now− is ‘0’), NOR 314 outputs logic ‘1’, turning on the connected NMOS transistor. Similarly, when d_next+ is ‘1’ (thus d_next− is ‘0’) and err_now+ is ‘1’ (thus err_now− is ‘0’), NOR 313 outputs a logic ‘1’, turning on the connected NMOS transistor. This particular configuration corresponds to the error signal err_now+ being the same as the current data decision d_now+, and such a scenario indicates that the sampling clock is late. Thus, the transistor biased by Vbn may be selectively enabled via NOR gates 313 and 314 to provide a charge pump down signal, which when provided to the VCO using inverted logic causes the frequency of the sampling clock to increase. Similar observations may be made for the set of logic branches 315 configured to detect transitional data pattern [1 0 0].
In one system embodiment similar to that of
An alternative phase comparator embodiment shown in
Specifically, set of logic branches 410 includes a PMOS branch that receives the complementary inputs d_now− and d_next minus, so that when the sequence of data decisions corresponds to [0 1 1] and the error_now+ is ‘0’, the transistor biased by
Similar observations may be made for the set of logic branches 415 that are configured to detect transitional data pattern [1 0 0], and to output a pump up or pump down signal in response to a comparison of the error signal to the current data decision.
The number of received data samples considered as part of the computation of DFE corrections will vary from embodiment to embodiment, depending on the communications channel characteristics. Different embodiments may also rely on pattern matching against different numbers of received data values in qualifying a clock error value, or indeed in determining which of several speculative data samples is correct. Thus, no limitation should be inferred from the specific size of the patterns used in the examples, or use of one stage of speculation. 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. The naming of e.g. 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.
In some system embodiments, received data signals and/or potential clock error values are captured in a history buffer 190 that may be made up of e.g., digital latches associated with each receive phase instance to provide the necessary history of values. In other embodiments, such storage is centralized, as examples in a data buffer, memory, or shift register. In some embodiments, said centralized storage may be associated and/or co-located with the DFE correction computation. In some embodiments, the history buffer includes separate buffer elements for independently maintaining data decisions and error signals.
While the above description focuses primarily on utilizing speculative DFE correction samples as error signals, it should be noted that other means of generating data and edge samples may be used as well. For example, at least one embodiment may generate the sequence of data decisions and the error signal in a double sampling mode, in which case one processing slice operating on e.g., phase 000 of the sampling clock may be generating data decisions, while another processing slice operating on e.g., phase 180 of the sampling clock may be generating edge samples. In such a double-rate schemed, the inputs of the combinatorial logic may be selectively modified. In particular, looking at
As is well known in the art, the number and location of transfer function poles and zeroes in the phase lock loop filter strongly impact the resulting loop stability and responsiveness. Some PLL embodiments as in
In some embodiments, it may be desirable for one of the filter time constants to be significantly longer than the other, as one example to provide a longer interval of “free wheeling” clock output at a stable frequency during gaps between clock error samples. In such cases, it may be desirable to have greater control than provided by circuit 800 over the relative amounts by which the short-time-constant and long-time-constant results impact the overall VCO control signal. The embodiment 820 modifies the previous analog filter by adjusting a first voltage 826 at an input of a proportional control circuit, using a filter having a first time constant associated with the filter made up of resistor/capacitor network including R1822 and capacitor 823, and a adjusting a second voltage 827 at an input of an integral control circuit using a filter having a second time constant from resistor/capacitor network including R2824 and capacitor 825. In some embodiments, R1<<R2, and the RC time constant associated with R2 is much larger than that of R1. As R1<<R2, the output current Icp of the charge pump will primarily flow through R1. The voltage on capacitor 823 reaches equilibrium based on the output current Icp, and pulses in the output current Icp generated responsive to early or late votes generate voltage pulses ΔV across R1 relative to the voltage Vcap on capacitor 823, as illustrated by the waveform of the voltage 826. The value of ΔV may be determined by numerous factors including the magnitude of output current Icp and resistor R1. The voltage pulses adjust an input voltage at the proportional control circuit generating the proportional control signal (described below with respect to proportional control circuit 891). As the voltage Vcap on capacitor 823 changes, a portion of the output current Icp may flow through R2, changing the voltage on capacitor 825. The voltage on capacitor 825 may change relatively slowly due to the higher RC time constant. As shown, the voltage on capacitor 825 is provided as an input voltage 827 to integral control circuit 892, while the voltage 826 is provided as an input voltage to proportional control circuit 891. The proportional and integral control signals may then be summed in summation circuit 850, e.g., by an analog current summation to produce an overall local oscillator control signal 829. In some embodiments, summation element 850 separately weights the proportional control signal 826 and integral control signal 827 to produce local oscillator control signal 829; as one example, input 827 may have nine times the effect on the result compared to input 826. In such embodiments, the integral control signal may have a higher relative weight applied to it to make large, slow (due to the integration of the early-late votes over time) changes to the frequency of the VCO to maintain a frequency lock of the VCO, while the proportional control signal may make relatively smaller magnitude frequency changes to the VCO to correct phase offsets between the VCO and the received data. Furthermore, the overall gain KVCO of the local oscillator control signal may be controlled by the individual gains KVCO1 and KVCO2 of the proportional control signal and the integral control signal, respectively. In one embodiment of 850 further detailed in
For more significant time constant differences, an analog integrated circuit embodiment of the longer time constant may become intractable. In such cases, a digital loop filter may be utilized to produce some or all of the necessary loop control signal. Rather than voltage on a capacitor, the storage element in a digital filter is a numeric value stored in a register, with an analog output result obtained using a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) controlled by that numeric value. Incremental “pump-up” and “pump-down” inputs to the digital filter may cause the storage register value to be incremented or decremented by a fixed or configured amount. Such a method should not be considered limiting, as any other known equivalent digital filter method may be used.
One known limitation of fully digital loop filters is that their discrete-time-sampling nature introduces an inherent latency, which may present itself in the PLL as undesirable clock jitter.
In embodiment 900, output current Icp is configured to adjust an input voltage 901 of a proportional control circuit 908 by sourcing and sinking current through resistive element 922. Furthermore, the output current Icp may be provided as an input to digital filter 904, which in response adjusts, as examples increments or decrements, a value in a digital counter, register, or memory, producing a digital result controlling DAC 905 that sets the voltage 907 on capacitor 923. Amplifier 915 may act as a buffer element preventing current flow to cap 923, which has a voltage 907 set by DAC 905. In
Although the simplified example of
In a further embodiment, a Digital Filter 906 may additionally incorporate start-up or initialization logic that presets its output to a predefined or configured value or adjusts its output to obtain a desired PLL output frequency before normal operation begins, to minimize loop start-up time or reduce the likelihood of false or spurious pseudo-loop-lock at an incorrect initial frequency.
In such an embodiment 950, the circuit of 820 is augmented by inclusion of digital control 910 driving DAC 906 and producing an output to set the voltages 956 and 957 connected to the proportional and integral control circuits, respectively, via switches 911 and 912. In some embodiments, the voltages on 956 and 957 may be set equally, while alternative embodiments may set voltages 956 and 957 independently. In one operational scenario, the digital control enables the DAC output during start-up or initialization, as one example to ensure that the PLL starts at or near (e.g., within 1%) of the correct frequency. In another operational scenario, the DAC continues to provide a small contribution to the combined phase error value during normal operation, representing a relatively long time constant result as in 900, or an offset or bias signal.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 16/439,483, filed Jun. 12, 2019, entitled “Low Latency Combined Clock Data Recovery Logic Network and Charge Pump Circuit,” which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/684,051, filed Jun. 12, 2018, entitled “Low Latency Combined Clock Data Recovery Logic Network and Charge Pump Circuit”, which is hereby incorporated herein by reference in its entirety for all purposes.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
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 |
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 |
8036300 | Evans et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8253454 | Lin | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8407511 | Mobin et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8583072 | Ciubotaru et al. | Nov 2013 | B1 |
8649476 | Malipatil et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8791735 | Shibasaki | Jul 2014 | B1 |
8929496 | Lee et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
9036764 | Hossain et al. | May 2015 | B1 |
9059816 | Simpson et al. | Jun 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 |
9577815 | Simpson et al. | Feb 2017 | B1 |
9602111 | Shen et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9906358 | Tajalli | Feb 2018 | B1 |
9960902 | Lin et al. | May 2018 | B1 |
10055372 | Shokrollahi | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10193716 | Hormati et al. | Jan 2019 | B2 |
10326435 | Arp et al. | Jun 2019 | B2 |
10574487 | Hormati | Feb 2020 | B1 |
10848351 | Hormati | Nov 2020 | B2 |
11070349 | Joo | Jul 2021 | B1 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
20110311008 | Slezak et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120051480 | Usugi et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120170621 | Tracy et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120200364 | Iizuka et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120206177 | Colinet et al. | Aug 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 |
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 |
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 |
20160056980 | Wang et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160087610 | Hata | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160134267 | Adachi | May 2016 | A1 |
20170005785 | Aleksic et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170019276 | Francese | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170228215 | Chatwin | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170310456 | Tajalli | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170317859 | Hormati | Nov 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 |
20180375693 | Zhou et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20190109735 | Norimatsu | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20190238308 | Tajalli | Aug 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 |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2019/036826, dated Sep. 23, 2019, 1-16 (16 pages). |
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). |
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). |
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). |
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). |
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). |
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). |
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). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20220216875 A1 | Jul 2022 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62684051 | Jun 2018 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 16439483 | Jun 2019 | US |
Child | 17704616 | US |