1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to placement in integrated circuit design.
2. State of the Art
The physical design of integrated circuits involves placement of gates within a design layout, representing a physical integrated circuit, and routing of interconnections (nets) between gates. The logical integrated circuit design is represented in the form of a netlist, i.e., a list of gates or collections of gates (macros) and nets interconnecting them. A graph representation of a netlist is shown in FIG. 1A. Through placement and routing, the logical integrated circuit design is translated to a physical integrated circuit design. Placement and routing are performed using Electronic Design Automation (EDA) software tools running on powerful computers.
Placement and routing are closely inter-related. As integration density increases, the sheer size of integrated circuit designs challenges current methods of physical design. Furthermore, physical design is required to be more exacting in order to avoid deleterious interactions and to ensure that all design constraints are met.
A number of approaches to the placement problem have been proposed, including simulated annealing, genetic algorithms, mathematical/linear programming, bisection type approaches, etc. One widely-practiced partitioning algorithm known as FM after its originators Fiduccia and Matheyses, is used as the basis for many placement algorithms. In FM, groups of features are formed, and features are exchanged between the groups so as to minimize the number of nets extending between the groups. The FM technique, an example of a module partitioning heuristic, may be represented as follows:
Gain refers to decrease in the number of nets crossing between opposite sides of the partition.
A major shortcoming of the foregoing technique, as well as other similar techniques, is that after a partition has been made, it is difficult or impossible for gates or modules to cross the partition boundary. This restriction often results in inferior placements. A cycling and overlapping partitioning process is described in Huang and Kahng, Partitioning-Based Standard Cell with an Exact Objective, Proc. of the International Symposium on Physical Design, April 1997. This approach, to a limited extent, does allow gates and modules to cross partition boundaries. However, the approach is not cluster-based (is slow) and does not exploit the full power of cycling and overlapping partitioning (produces less-than-adequate quality).
In short none of these existing placement techniques appears well-equipped to meet the challenges of the deep sub-micron era.
The present invention, generally speaking, provides a placement method for the physical design of integrated circuits in which natural topological feature clusters (topo-clusters) are discovered and exploited during the placement process. Topo-clusters may be formed based on various criteria including, for example, functional similarity, proximity (in terms of number of nets), and genus. Genus refers to a representation of a netlist in terms of a number of planar netlists—netlists in which no crossing of nets occurs. Topo-clusters drive initial placement, with all of the gates of a topo-cluster being placed initially in a single bin of the placement layout or within a group of positionally-related bins. The portion of a topo-cluster placed within a given bin is called a quanto-cluster. An iterative placement refinement process then follows, using a technique referred to herein as Geometrically-Bounded FM (GBFM), and in particular Dual GBFM. In GBFM, FM is applied on a local basis to windows encompassing some number of bins. From iteration to iteration, windows may shift position and vary in size. When a region bounded by a window meets a specified cost threshold in terms of a specified cost function, that region does not participate. The cost function takes account of actual physical metrics—delay, area, congestion, power, etc. “Dual” refers to the fact that each iteration has two phases. During a first phase, FM is performed within a region on a quanto-cluster basis. During a second phase, FM is performed within the region on a gate basis. GBFM occurs in the context of recursive quadrisection. Hence, after GBFM has been completed, a further quadrisection step is performed in which each bin is divided into four bins, with a quarter of the gates of the original bin being placed in the center of each of the resulting bins. GBFM then follows, and the cycle repeats until each bin contains a fairly small number of gates. Following the foregoing global placement process, the circuit is then ready for detailed placement in which cells are assigned to placement rows.
The present invention may be further understood from the following description in conjunction with the appended drawing. In the drawing:
The present placement method is guided by a number of important decisions that contribute to the overall strength of the placement method. First, the placement method is based on clustering. Present day designs are too large to be considered in flat mode. Gates must therefore be clustered to reduce the design space. Second, the placement method is based on quadrisection techniques. Quadrisection techniques are extremely fast as compared to annealing or mathematical programming methods. Quadrisection, as opposed to bisection, better models the two-dimensional nature of the placement problem. Third, the placement technique allows for gates to cross quadrisection boundaries.
Referring to
The concept of clustering is illustrated in FIG. 1B. During clustering, topologically-related circuit elements are grouped together. In
Clustering may be accomplished by various techniques including, for example, techniques based on functional similarity, netlist distance, and genus analysis. Each of these variations will be described in turn.
The nature of netlists makes clustering based on functional similarity quite straightforward. Each cell instance is given a unique name. Related cell instances are given cell names that are quite evidently related. For example, a register might be composed of some number of flip-flops. These flip-flops may have the instance names top/u1/registers/control_ff[7], top/u1/registers/control_ff[6], . . . , top/u1/registers/control_ff[0]. A netlist parser may readily form clusters based on instance name relatedness. Alternatively, information concerning functional relatedness may be determined during logic synthesis based on a high level (e.g., Verilog, VHDL) description and preserved within the netlist format itself. The latter approach is preferable in that functional relatedness is best determined based on a high-level description, but may not be possible if the input netlist does not already include information concerning functional relatedness.
In distance-based clustering, whether two gates belong to the same cluster is determined based on a distance measure. The distance of two gates in a circuit can be defined as the minimum number of nets (or gates) visited in going from the first gate to the second. A bottom-up clustering method is used. Initially, each circuit element is its own cluster. Clusters are then merged to form larger clusters, based on distance considerations.
Clustering may also be performed based on hyper-graph analysis of the netlist graph. A hyper-graph is a graph in which each edge of the graph may have multiple endpoints. A planar graph is one in which no graph edges cross. The genus of a hyper-graph is the number of planar sub-graphs needed to represent it.
Clusters formed by any of the foregoing methods, or by other methods that take into account circuit topology, are referred to as natural clusters or topological (topo) clusters.
The identification of clusters may involve trial and error. The following cost function may be used in evaluating the quality of a topo-clustering:
Kij=(Pij−1)/(Ti−1)
where Kij is the “credit” of net Ni in cluster j, Pij is the total number of terminals of net Ni in cluster j and Ti is the total number of terminals of net i. The absorption cut benefit, K, is defined as the summation of Kij over all nets and all topo-clusters. If m denotes the number of topo-clusters, a good topo-clustering is one with large values of K and m.
The usefulness of topo-clusters is evident in both obtaining a good initial placement of circuit elements and in performing placement refinement. Using topo-clusters, the initial placement may be expected to have a significantly lower cost function (and hence be significantly closer to the final placement) than if topo-clusters are not used. Also, using topo-clusters, the cost function of the placement may be reduced in a more computationally-efficient manner.
In one exemplary embodiment, initial placement is performed by, beginning in the center of the design layout, using the bins in a predetermined spiral order to place each cluster in turn in as many bins as required by the cluster, as shown in FIG. 3. In placing topo-clusters, the topo-clusters become “bin-quantized” to form quanto-clusters. In an alternative embodiment, initial placement is performed in serpentine fashion, e.g., in row-major order for a first row of bins, reverse-row-major order for a succeeding row of bins, then row-major order again, etc. Preferably, topo-clusters are not placed in random order but rather are ordered based on a measure of the inter-relatedness of different topo-clusters.
Following initial placement, placement refinement occurs. Placement refinement is performed iteratively, each iteration involving quadrisection followed by a variant of FM, referred to herein as Dual GBFM. “Dual” refers to the fact that moves are performed first at the quanto-cluster level and then at the gate level. Dual GBFM differs from conventional FM in numerous respects, including the following:
The GBFM process allows cells assigned to one partition to freely move to another partition using a controlled mechanism. GBFM, in accordance with exemplary embodiments, is described by the pseudo-code routines of FIG. 9 and FIG. 10. Referring first to
GBFM operates both on a quanto-cluster (bin) basis (first half of GBFM) and on a gate basis (second half of GBFM).
Referring to
Following GBFM quadrisection is again performed as illustrated in FIG. 5. During quadrisection, the circuit elements are divided into fourths, with one fourth of the circuit elements being placed in each of four new bins, as illustrated in FIG. 6. The circuit elements are placed in the center of the new bins. Quadrisection is followed again by GBFM. This process repeats until each bin contains a small number of gates, e.g. ten or a few tens of gates.
Following the foregoing global placement process, the circuit is then ready for detailed placement in which cells are assigned to placement rows as illustrated in FIG. 7.
The foregoing process may be more fully understood with reference to a specific example. Referring to
Placement refinement then ensues, beginning with global moves, i.e., exchange of quanto-clusters, followed by local moves, i.e., exchange of gates. Global moves and local moves are applied within regions (windows) as previously described. In
Following GBFM, quadrisection then follows. Each bin is divided into four smaller bins and the cells within the bin are divided into four groups, each group being parcelled out to a different one of the new smaller bins. In the simplified example, as shown in
The present invention may be embodied in various forms, including computer-implemented methods, computer systems configured to implement such methods, computer-readable media containing instructions for implementing such methods, etc. Examples of computer-implemented methods embodying the invention have been described. Reducing such methods to tangible form as computer-readable media may be accomplished by methods well-known in the art.
Referring to
It will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill in the art that the invention can be embodied in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or essential character thereof. The presently disclosed embodiments are therefore considered in all respects to be illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention is indicated by the appended claims rather than the foregoing description, and all changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalents thereof are intended to be embraced therein.
It will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill in the art that the invention can be embodied in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or essential character thereof. The presently disclosed embodiments are therefore considered in all respects to be illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention is indicated by the appended claims rather than the foregoing description, and all changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalents thereof are intended to be embraced therein.
This application is a continuation application under the continuing application procedure of 37 C.F.R. §1.53(b)(1) now U.S. Pat. No. 09/097,107, entitled “Placement Method for Integrated Circuit Design Using TOPO-Clustering,” filed Jun. 12, 1998. This application is related by subject matter to U.S. Pat. No. 6,286,128, entitled Method for Design Optimization Using Logical and Physical Information, issued Sep. 4, 2001, and incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5418728 | Yada | May 1995 | A |
5491641 | Scepanovic et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5493507 | Shinde et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5495419 | Rostoker et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5526517 | Jones et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5557533 | Koford et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5636125 | Rostoker et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5661663 | Scepanovic et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5682321 | Ding et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5682322 | Boyle et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5696693 | Aubel et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5699265 | Scepanovic et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5712793 | Scepanovic et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5748844 | Marks | May 1998 | A |
5787268 | Sugiyama et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5836585 | Scepanovic et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5854752 | Agrawal | Dec 1998 | A |
5857243 | Champion | Jan 1999 | A |
5870313 | Boyle et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5903461 | Rostoker et al. | May 1999 | A |
5909376 | Scepanovic et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5914887 | Scepanovic et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5955776 | Ishikawa | Sep 1999 | A |
6030110 | Scepanovic et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6067409 | Scepanovic et al. | May 2000 | A |
6099580 | Boyle et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6146117 | Eng | Nov 2000 | A |
6286128 | Pileggi et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6301694 | Lee et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6442743 | Sarrafzadeh et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20020138816 A1 | Sep 2002 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09097107 | Jun 1998 | US |
Child | 10136161 | US |