The description relates to screening techniques for semiconductor devices.
One or more embodiments can be applied advantageously, yet not exclusively, to semiconductor devices intended for use in the automotive sector; in that sector, automotive system manufacturers expect component suppliers to ship components with 0 ppm, that is, devices having zero failures per million devices.
Burn-in and dynamic voltage stress at high voltage (briefly, HVST) are conventionally used to screen the “infant” mortality rate of semiconductor devices.
An approach which is often used is based on scan architectures which facilitate stressing various internal nodes of a device.
Scan chains might face problems related to high-voltage operation in so far as such architectures may be sensitive to “hold” timing violations.
These violations may not be easy to identify or fix. This results in a potentially high area penalty: these violations may in fact correspond to stress conditions outside the functional range dictated by specifications. If such a condition arises, a corresponding library cannot be characterized and this militates against a precise analysis.
According to one or more embodiments, a circuit is provided.
Scan chain architecture may be exemplary of such a circuit.
One or more embodiments may relate to a corresponding method.
A scanning method wherein a sampling edge of consecutive flip-flops (FFs) can be set as function of a logic value may be exemplary of such a method.
One or more embodiments may include a clock inversion logic applied to FFs.
One or more embodiments may include flip-flops having a pin configured to keep or invert a sampling edge.
This facilitates implementing solutions without custom flip-flops by simply adding (outer) clock inversion logic the flip-flops.
For instance, one or more embodiments may involve the addition of a pin (e.g., “CKT”) on each flip-flop configured to keep or invert the sampling edge of consecutive flip-flops as a function of a logic value present at that pin.
One or more embodiments will now be described, by way of example only, with reference to the annexed figures, wherein:
In the ensuing description, one or more specific details are illustrated, aimed at providing an in-depth understanding of examples of embodiments of this description. The embodiments may be obtained without one or more of the specific details, or with other methods, components, materials, etc. In other cases, known structures, materials, or operations are not illustrated or described in detail so that certain aspects of embodiments will not be obscured.
Reference to “an embodiment” or “one embodiment” in the framework of the present description is intended to indicate that a particular configuration, structure, or characteristic described in relation to the embodiment is comprised in at least one embodiment. Hence, phrases such as “in an embodiment” or “in one embodiment” that may be present in one or more points of the present description do not necessarily refer to one and the same embodiment.
Moreover, particular conformations, structures, or characteristics may be combined in any adequate way in one or more embodiments.
As discussed, while representing an approach frequently adopted in order to screen “infant” mortality of semiconductor devices, stress testing at high supply voltage suffers from the fact that the devices tested are not per se designed to work in such extreme conditions.
As a result, burn-in and dynamic voltage stress (DVS) at high voltage (HVST) turn out to be critical in so far as the devices tested are pushed beyond their functional specifications.
In fact, such an approach relies on the rationale that, when applying a stress voltage above the specifications, an increased voltage applied results in a stress time of reduced duration (and in reduced costs of testing). However, operating a circuit in such “out-of-range” conditions may have undesired implications in terms of design complexity (for instance, timing corners may not be available) and area overhead.
Scan chains such as the one designated 10 as illustrated in
Automatic test pattern generation (ATPG) facilitates generating stimulus test patterns in such a way that (virtually) all the nodes present in the logic CL are stimulated and verified for manufacturing defects/faults using techniques such as, for instance (among various techniques used to facilitate achieving a desired ppm performance), burn-in and dynamic voltage stress at high voltage (briefly, HVST).
As conventionally appreciated by those of skill in the art, a basic purpose of scan architecture 10 as illustrated in
A scan chain 10 as illustrated in
Such a clock signal can be generated in a manner known to those of skill in the art via a control circuit S.
While six flip-flops are exemplified here for ease of explanation, the chain 10 may in fact comprise a different number, virtually any plural number of flip-flops.
Also, flip-flops belonging to a same clock domain (that is, sharing a single clock signal) will be considered throughout for simplicity and ease of understanding; in fact, the discussion herein may apply to scan chains operating with different clock signals/in different clock domains.
In a current implementation, scan flip-flops as illustrated herein internally have a multiplexer M at their input.
A test enable signal (generated in a manner known to those of skill in the art, for instance via the control circuit S—the related connection is not visible for simplicity of representation) applied to test enable nodes TE of the flip-flops determines whether a D (functional) input or a TI (test) input reaches to the output Q of the flip-flop when an active clock edge comes at CK.
In a full scan arrangement, all the flip-flops in the logic CL are replaced with scan flip-flops.
These are connected together in form of a scan chain which acts as a shift register when the design is in a Shift Test Mode (that is, with the test enable signal TE asserted). The first flip-flop of the scan chain is connected to a scan input and the last flip-flop in the scan chain is connected to a scan output.
Scan chain operation can be regarded as involving three stages, namely scan in (this is the scan_in shift mode phase where the FFs in the chain are loaded through scan in pins serially), capture (the design is kept in functional timing mode and test pattern response is captured) and scan out (this is the scan-out shift mode phase where FFs in the chain are un-loaded through scan out pins; scan-in phase can proceed concurrently).
It noted that in so-called “partial scan” arrangements some of the flip-flops may not be configured to act as scan flip-flops. A full scan arrangement facilitates improving test results against somewhat increased complexity.
Structure and operation of a scan chain as discussed previously is otherwise conventional in the art. Reference may be had in that respect, merely by way of example, to S. Sharma: “Scan Chains: PnR Outlook” (see design-reuse.com). This makes it unnecessary to provide a more detailed description herein.
An issue related to operation of a scan chain 10 as illustrated in
Similarly, for the same reasons, signals at the TI (test) inputs may be received during the test mode with different delays D1, D2, D3, D4, D5 (see, for instance, the—purely exemplary—values 0.5 ns, 1.3 ns, 2.1 ns, 0.2 ns and 1.2 ns indicated in
As illustrated in
Of these three possible time behaviors (collectively referred to as Data):
In general terms (referring by way of example to a pair of adjacent flip-flops 10j and 10j+1 in the cascaded arrangement of
where:
The—purely exemplary—numerical values reported in
With the—purely exemplary—numerical values reported in
It is noted that the related timing of the signals as discussed in the foregoing is dependent on circuit layout and the manufacturing technology and cannot be changed with pattern generation.
A possible solution to fix the (hold) time issues discussed in the foregoing may involve adding further buffers such as D1, . . . , D5 between the Q and TI nodes of the flip-flops, on top of those added to prevent violations at the design rule checking (DRC), that is to increase the delay Dj in order to meet the rule mentioned in the foregoing.
A drawback of this solution may be related to the fact that it is not intrinsically robust.
Also, hold analysis may be involved in order to facilitate adequate functionality in forecasting a Voltage and Temperature corner (briefly, VT Corner) used in burn-in/dynamic voltage stress conditions.
In most instances, library characterization models of these VT corner conditions are not available in so far as these are out of functional specifications.
Also, in case different threshold cell types are used on data and clock paths—i.e., standard Vt (SVT), low Vt (LVT) and ultra-low Vt (ULVT)—the respective derating factors might be different, which undesirably involves a specific analysis.
Another possible solution to mitigate “hold” violations would involve separate outputs provided for certain sequential cell elements (such as flip-flops). For instance, a functional Q node may be connected to the functional logic CL only and a scan out node may be connected only to the next test input TI node. Such a scan out driver could be designed with low strength to have a delay in the signal propagation (3 ns, for instance).
This would create an infrastructure which is somewhat more robust in respect of hold time failure as possibly induced by high voltage operation.
However, this solution would not be intrinsically robust and would be unable to be verified when VT corner information is not available, with an ensuing risk that potential critical issues may surface only at the semiconductor level (“on silicon”).
In one or more embodiments, possible hold violations between consecutive flip-flops in a scan chain such as 10 can be countered by changing the sampling edges of adjacent subsequent (consecutive) flip-flops in the scan chain.
A scan chain 10 exemplary of such embodiments is exemplified in
Unless the context indicates otherwise, parts or elements like parts or elements already discussed in connection with
In
Again, while six flip-flops are exemplified for ease of explanation, the chain 10 may in fact comprise a different number, virtually any plural number of flip-flops.
In one or more embodiments as exemplified in
This latter arrangement is exemplified in
As exemplified in
It is noted that:
For the sake of simplicity, the instant exemplary representation refers to flip-flops 101 to 106:
It will be appreciated that the embodiments are not limited to such exemplary representation and/or to either type of flip-flops, in so far as they rely on possible inversion of the original edge (irrespective of rising or falling).
As exemplified in
As a result, of edge inversion, adjacent flip-flops in the chain (here 101 and 102, 102 and 103, 103 and 104, 104 and 105, 105 and 106) will have mutually opposed (inverted) sampling edges.
In one or more embodiments as exemplified in
It is noted that the line TM will be generally different from the Test Enable (TE) input to the flip-flops, which goes high when shift is performed, and in capture mode.
This facilitates having the line TM normally set stable to active mode when Burn-In HVST is performed, with the Test Enable (TE) input to the flip-flops activated (high) during shift and deactivated (low) during capture.
It is otherwise noted that in certain conditions the line TM could be kept low in capture also in Burn-In.
The representation of
It will be appreciated that this representation is merely for ease of description insofar as (as discussed in the following) all of the flip-flops 101 to 106 may be coupled to the line TM and be configured to provide or not to provide for edge inversion based on logic signal processing.
As illustrated in
It will be otherwise appreciated that, in the presence of, say, a flip-flop (103, by way of example) “natively” of a falling edge type, the node CKT at that flip-flop can be regarded as connected to GND insofar as the rule of edge inversion between adjacent flip-flops (with respect to the flip-flops 102 and 104, in the exemplary case considered) is already respected without a connection to CKT.
One or more embodiments thus rely on the recognition that having edges inverted as discussed previously provides a half-clock-period margin.
In conventional solutions as illustrated in
introduced in the foregoing.
By way of contrast, as a result of having edges inverted as discussed previously in connection with
where, again
This relationship indicates that inverting edges as discussed previously provides a half-clock-period margin which facilitates avoiding hold violations (see the third diagram in
In fact, CKhalfperiod can be increased—that is the clock frequency decreased—in order to accommodate Dj and/or the two values for Ckdel10j and Ckdel10j+1 to (further) facilitate correct shift operation.
As discussed, such an edge inversion can be integrated in the flip-flops such as 101 to 106 (as represented in
In the circuit diagram of
Similarly, conventional arrangements are illustrated in
In the possible implementation of
As exemplified in
As exemplified in
As exemplified in
The diagrams of
One or more embodiments as exemplified herein may advantageously provide a flexible solution which facilitates:
In this latter respect, both optimizing the flip-flop structure embedding an EXOR logic (as presented in
Additionally, one or more embodiments as exemplified herein may advantageously provide fault coverage of an added CKT signal provided during ATPG manufacturing test.
One or more embodiments as exemplified herein may effectively address issues related to the fact that voltage stress may represent a challenge in so far as the circuit (logic) being screened is forced to operate (well) above its functional specifications.
As noted, a conventional scan method as currently used to stress a device in such extreme conditions may suffer from drawbacks related to the fact that the scan architecture rely on a hold timing in order to facilitate correct shift operation which may otherwise be critical and area consuming.
One or more embodiments facilitate overcoming such a limitation via adequate shift operation (also) in these extreme conditions against a reduced area overhead.
Briefly, a circuit (for instance, 10) as exemplified herein may comprise:
In a circuit as exemplified herein, the flip-flops in the chain may comprise a set (for instance, 101, 103, 105) of flip-flops configured to receive an edge inversion signal (for instance, TM) and to selectively invert said active clock edges in response to said edge inversion signal being asserted.
In a circuit as exemplified herein, said set of flip-flops may consist of non-adjacent flip-flops in the chain (for instance, 101, 103 and 105).
In a circuit as exemplified herein, said set of flip-flops may consists of alternate flip-flops in the chain (for instance, flip-flops 101, 103 and 105) wherein each flip-flop in said set has one or two adjacent flip-flops in the chain configured to maintain said active clock edges irrespective of said edge inversion signal being asserted.
For instance, as exemplified herein:
In a circuit as exemplified herein, the flip-flops in said set (for instance, 101, 103, 105) comprise logic circuitry configured to receive said edge inversion signal and to invert said sampling edge in response to said edge inversion signal being asserted.
In a circuit as exemplified herein, said logic circuitry may comprise EX-OR logic circuitry.
In a “normal” flip-flop, such EX-OR circuitry can be replaced with an inverter.
A method as exemplified herein may comprise:
A method as exemplified herein may comprise applying an edge inversion signal (for instance, TM) to a set of flip-flops (for instance, 101, 103, 105) in the chain to selectively invert said active clock edge applied thereto.
Advantageously, said edge inversion signal may be applied to said set of flip-flops in the chain during high-voltage and/or temperature testing (for instance, during burn-in and dynamic voltage stress at high voltage—HVST) of said logic circuitry (for instance, CL).
A method as exemplified herein may comprise reducing the frequency of said at least one clock signal (for instance, Clock) distributed to the flip-flops in the chain, with said edge inversion signal applied to said set of flip-flops in the chain.
As discussed, reducing the frequency of the clock signal (namely increasing CKhalfperiod) when the edge inversion signal is applied to these flip-flops facilitates accommodating Dj and/or the two values for Ckdel10j and Ckdel10j+1 in the relationship:
introduced in the foregoing, which results in correct shift operation.
A method exemplified herein may comprise applying said edge inversion signal to a set (101, 103, 105) of non-adjacent flip-flops in the chain (for instance 101, 103 and 105 out of 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106).
A method as exemplified herein may comprise applying said edge inversion signal to a set of alternate flip-flops in the chain wherein each flip-flop in said set (101, 103, 105) has one or two adjacent flip-flops in the chain configured to maintain said active clock edges (as exemplified by being coupled to ground in
That is, as exemplified herein:
Without prejudice to the underlying principles, the details and embodiments may vary with respect to what has been described by way of example only without departing from the extent of protection.
The various embodiments described above can be combined to provide further embodiments. These and other changes can be made to the embodiments in light of the above-detailed description. In general, in the following claims, the terms used should not be construed to limit the claims to the specific embodiments disclosed in the specification and the claims, but should be construed to include all possible embodiments along with the full scope of equivalents to which such claims are entitled. Accordingly, the claims are not limited by the disclosure.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
102021000003536 | Feb 2021 | IT | national |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6901544 | Huth et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
8866527 | Lewis | Oct 2014 | B1 |
20030197541 | Campbell | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20060026473 | Patrick Tan | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20090240997 | Hasegawa | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20100318862 | Niiyama | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20150212150 | Mittal | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20160241219 | Kim et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20190089337 | Venugopal | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20220263499 | Casarsa | Aug 2022 | A1 |
20230079823 | Ooigawa | Mar 2023 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20220263499 A1 | Aug 2022 | US |