The invention relates generally to simulation and timing verification technology, and more particularly to a method and system for transistor-level timing analysis using embedded simulation.
Static timing analysis (STA) allows quick and comprehensive timing verification of large circuits. Compared to simulation, STA is much faster and guarantees identification of the critical paths in a circuit. Simulation, on the other hand, is impractical for large circuits because simulators are typically slow and sometimes fail to find the right input vectors to excite the critical paths. Usually, STA has three main steps: (1) calculating delays of individual gates and interconnect, (2) adding up the delays of all gates to obtain the path delays for the entire circuit, and (3) verifying the circuit constraints by checking whether certain signal transitions occur before or after certain other transitions. For gate-level circuits, a pre-characterized timing model is used for each gate type. Typically the timing models, which are part of the design library, are generated only once, allowing extensive simulations to be performed in order to accurately model each gate. For transistor-level circuits, however, there are no pre-characterized gates, and delay calculation must be performed on the fly. A well-known method for analyzing circuits of this type is circuit simulation, which produces very detailed timing information, such as waveforms and delays, by solving non-linear differential equations. However, this method is very time consuming and requires a large number of input vectors to be applied to the circuit. In addition, there are problems in finding appropriate input vectors to simulate the critical paths of a circuit. Therefore, direct use of simulation is inapplicable to large, practical circuits.
To speed up STA for transistor-level circuits, various approximation methods for delay calculation based on heuristic formulas or lookup tables have been developed. These methods provide a closed form solution to a non-linear system of equations describing gate behavior and are commonly used in delay calculators. However, as features sizes become smaller, these approximation methods become increasingly inaccurate because new considerations, which were previously neglected, must be taken into account. Enhanced models that attempt to rectify this accuracy deficiency not only become cumbersome but also produce results that under certain conditions are questionable. For high accuracy and reliability, closed form expression for delay can no longer be used. Therefore, it has become necessary to go back to the method of solving non-linear equations via numerical integration, i.e., using circuit simulation.
This invention provides a high accuracy system and method for transistor-level STA based on efficient use of an embedded simulator. The system and method employ several unique features to minimize simulation time. The key to the efficiency of the proposed approach is a master-based delay calculation scheme whereby simulation is performed only for small groups of transistors called channel connected components (CCCs). Before analyzing a circuit, the system first identifies the circuit's unique CCCs, also called masters. All the masters of a circuit design are preloaded into a simulator. When the delays of a particular CCC need to be calculated, only the master corresponding to this CCC is simulated. The masters are parameterized so that all the device and interconnect parameters (such as device widths, resistor resistances, and node wire capacitances) for an instance of the master can be set during simulation. A fanout reduction technique is proposed that collapses all similar fanout devices into one device so as to minimize the number of masters.
Another key feature that enhances the efficiency is the use of a single simulation to calculate worst case delay. The fixed voltages on the side inputs and the initial voltages on internal nodes of CCCs are chosen to give the worst case delay by maximizing the number of nodes, and hence the capacitance, to be charged or discharged. This method also ensures that short-circuit effect is taken into account. Normally, a single input of a CCC is allowed to switch. However, in case of transmission gates, both the FET gate inputs switch for increased accuracy. Otherwise, switching only one FET gate may cause the output to fail to switch completely. Tight integration of the simulator into the STA system allows to run the simulator long enough to obtain delay and signal transition times and thus enhances the runtime performance.
Another key feature of the method is the use of a novel caching scheme to minimize the number of simulations required. Data relative to each performed simulation is saved with the intent of using that data to derive estimated results for other prospective simulations. Given a candidate CCC whose delays need to be determined, the cache is searched to find other CCC's of the same master, whose simulation input parameter values (device widths, node wire capacitances, etc.) are close to those of the candidate. If such CCC's are found, a Gram-Schmidt Orthonormalization algorithm is applied to estimate the simulation result for the candidate CCC. Even though a tight matching criterion is used in order to maintain high accuracy (within 1%), it has been observed that the number of cache hits is typically very high. The experiments performed on several industrial and benchmark circuits to evaluate the effectiveness of the cache indicate that the caching scheme can reduce the run time by as much as 96%. Overall, the simulation results obtained using the method according to this invention are accurate to within 5% of conventional simulation, with performance approaching that of a model based STA.
a) is a circuit diagram illustrating an exemplary circuit with four basic sub-circuits 1-4 identified in dashed line;
b) is a circuit diagram illustrating a first master sub-circuit which 3 represents the basic sub-circuits 1-2 identified in the circuit of
c) is a circuit diagram illustrating a second master sub-circuit which represents the sub-circuit 3 in the circuit of
d) is a circuit diagram illustrating a third master sub-circuit which represents the sub-circuit 4 in the circuit of
a)-(c) are three circuit diagrams illustrating three sub-circuits on which SPICE simulations were performed;
d) is a circuit diagram showing an equivalent sub-circuit (i.e. a master sub-circuit) of the three sub-circuits illustrated in
e) is graphical representation showing a comparison of circuit delays with actual loading vs. equivalent loading for each of the three sub-circuits illustrated in
a) is a circuit diagram illustrating a master sub-circuit with a single gate;
b) is a value table showing the corresponding excitation voltages for two arcs identified in
c) is a circuit diagram illustrating a master sub-circuit with multiple gates;
d) is a value table illustrating the excitation voltages for an arc identified in
Referring to
A timing report device 125, which is a built-in incremental timing capability, allows quick recalculation of the circuit delays affected by local circuit modifications. This feature enables various applications, including circuit optimization 130 and block characterization 135, to be linked into this system to form a comprehensive transistor-level timing solution.
For a small circuit, it is feasible to simulate the entire circuit and calculate its delays. However, it is either impossible or computationally very expensive to simulate large circuits as a whole. The key idea of this invention is to partition a large, transistor-level circuit into a number of small sub-circuits and then simulate each master sub-circuit individually.
A transistor-level circuit consists of channel connected components (CCCs), which are groups of transistors connected via source/drain pins and resistors. Some of these CCCs, in different instances, may be represented by a same basic sub-circuit. Only values such as transistor sizes, capacitances and other similar parameters might vary from instance to instance. Each such unique basic sub-circuit is called a master or a master sub-circuit. The RC interconnect networks are part of the masters.
The purposes to extract master sub-circuits from a transistor-level circuit are (1) to reduce the size of the netlist 110 to be loaded into the simulator (EMU2) 160; (2) to avoid reloading of the netlist in the simulator; and (3) to allow the simulation of each sub-circuit separately by simulating the corresponding master sub-circuit only.
The master extractor 140 traverses the input netlist 110 and identifies all sub-circuits of the circuit. It creates a new master each time a new basic sub-circuit (CCC) is found. It uses a pattern recognition algorithm to match the same basic sub-circuits. Finally, once all the masters are found, the master extractor 140 creates a two-level hierarchical netlist with these masters instantiated at the top level. This netlist is given to the circuit simulator 160 as input during delay calculation.
The masters are parameterized in order for each one to represent all the CCCs having the same basic sub-circuit. Each master has the following parameterizable attributes: device width (W), device source area (AS), device drain area (AD), device source perimeter (PS), device drain perimeter (PD), wire resistance values and node wire capacitance values. These attributes are set before the simulation.
In order to decrease the number of masters that need to be created, the loading (fanout) devices for each master output port are reduced to two FET devices (p-gate and n-gate) with equivalent parameters as shown in
Now referring to
The output waveforms obtained in this experiment are plotted in
The delay of a gate usually can be found by simulating the gate with a set of input vectors. However, even for small circuits, this method requires multiple simulations. The method according to this invention uses a single simulation to calculate the worst case delay by carefully choosing the input excitations and the internal node initial conditions.
The timing behavior of each sub-circuit or gate in the circuit is represented internally by a set of arcs, corresponding to the causal relationships between its inputs and outputs. For an arc, all the devices through which the output is charged or discharged are called arc devices, the path from the supply to the arc output node through the arc devices is called the arc path and the arc device driven by the arc input is called the trigger device.
Referring to
A waveform with a single transition, rise or fall, is applied to the switching input of a sub-circuit. For a primary input, a two-point waveform is derived from the input slew. For an intermediate node, the output of the driving gate produces the input waveform. Normally, a single input of a sub-circuit is allowed to switch. However, in case of transmission gates, both the FET gate inputs switch for increased accuracy. Switching only one FET gate may cause the output to fail to switch completely. Also, one of the transmission gate input waveforms is delayed by the difference in arrival times between two gate inputs.
The fixed voltages on the side inputs and the initial voltages on internal nodes are set to give the worst case delay by maximizing the number of nodes, and hence the capacitance, to be charged or discharged. The algorithm to find the worst case excitation voltages, first sets the default excitations for all the nodes in the master sub-circuit to the arc output initial state. It then turns ON all the devices on the arc path and if necessary, overwrites the default initial voltages on internal nodes connected to supply or ground. Finally, it traverses each device on paths from arc output node to supply and ground and turns it ON, if it does not enable a parallel path to supply or ground. For a given arc, the excitation voltages can be found using the following procedure:
If a master sub-circuit has multiple gates connected through a complex pass-gate structure, there may be side paths driving the arc output node. The excitation voltages for nodes in the side path are determined by propagating output node excitation through turned ON pass-gates and the driving devices. This method results in absolute worst case excitations for most circuits. The circuit types supported include static CMOS, pass-gates, latches and domino gates.
Once the master parameters are set, the simulator (EMU2) is called. Its dynamic regionization and event-based algorithm provide fast yet accurate simulations (<5% accuracy and 10-50×faster vs. SPICE). In this invention, enhancements have been made to provide for dynamically controllable simulation with a callback mechanism, and master-based simulation to avoid circuit reloading. The simulator's tight integration into the STA environment allows the simulation to be run only for the period long enough to calculate the delay and output slew, thus enhancing the performance. Finally, the delay and slew values are calculated from the input and output waveforms.
The concept of global caching is to cache or save data relative to specific simulations with the intent of using that data to derive estimated results for other prospective simulations. The goal is to substantially reduce the number of simulations required during execution. The keys to caching are that cache retrieval must be efficient and the retrieved result must be very close to the result that would have occurred if simulation were performed.
A simulation can be considered as a function S(pi) where pi represents various inputs to the simulation with S being the result, i.e., output waveform. The input parameters to the simulation include: the master sub-circuit, the input node excitations, the internal node initial conditions, the device sizes (W, AS, AD, PS, PD), the node capacitances, the wire resistances, and the output node. These input parameters are classified into two types: discrete or fixed type and variable type. The discrete or fixed type parameters include master sub-circuit, nodes, and initial conditions. Simulations that differ on any of these fixed parameters are fundamentally different simulations. Incremental changes in variable type parameters result in incremental differences in the simulation results. Thus, the inputs to every simulation can be represented as a point P, whose coordinates are the input parameters, and thus having the form (pfj, pvk), where pfj represent the fixed type parameters and pvk represent the variable type parameters.
For the purpose of caching, input waveforms are represented by three values, those being fall to rise time (tfr), time to threshold (tthr), and threshold offset from first input waveform (toff). On the other hand, output waveforms, which are the results of simulations, are stored in the cache essentially intact. They undergo a reduction that eliminates redundant points along contiguous segments of the piecewise-linear waveform whose slopes are within a pre-set tolerance. This reduction preserves waveform integrity, and typically results in a 50%-75% reduction in waveform size. Using the following definitions for waveform (wf)
tvlow(wf): wf low voltage time (normally 10%)
tvthresh(wf): wf threshold voltage time (normally 50%)
tvhigh(wf) wf high voltage time (normally 90%)
the formulae for the input waveform representation are
tfr(wf)=tvhigh(wf)−tvlow(wf),
tthr(wf)=tvthresh(wf)−min(tvlow(wf),tvhigh(wf)),
toff(wf)=tvthresh(wf)−tvthresh(wfinput1)
In order for retrieval to be efficient, points are partitioned into multi-dimensional rectangular grids, called point classes. The grid point function G(P) is used to determine the point class that P should be placed in.
The result G(P)=(g(pfj), g(pvk)) is determined as follows. For fixed parameters, g(pfj)=pfj. For variable parameters, each parameter type has a pre-defined parameter range array, A[0 . . . N], with A[0]=0.
g(pvk)=m if A[m]_≦pvk<A[m+1] and 0≦Pvk<A[N]
For example, the range array for capacitance is {0, 1×10−14, 3.2×10−14, 1×10−13, 3.2×10−13, 1×10−12, 5×10−12}). So for capacitance value pv=75 FF, g(pv)=2. Referring to
The formula for closeness between P and Q is
C(P,Q)=(Σ(((pvk−qvk)wk/rk)2)/Σ(wk2))1/2
where rk, the range size for pvk, is given by
and wk is the relative weighting of the parameter type of pvk. The weightings of 1.0 for time values, 0.7 for device sizes, 0.7 for capacitances, 0.3 for resistances and 0.1 for areas were determined to yield the best results. Benchmarking revealed that points must be very close for cached results to be close enough to use in lieu of simulation. The implementation according to this invention provides 4 levels of cache usage, with cache level 2, for example, requiring closeness values, C(P, Q)≦0.003, to result in cached results within 3% of simulation.
Once a close point Q is found, the slope (S) of the delay function along vector QP needs to be computed. By multiplying this slope S, with |QP|, the difference between delay(P) and delay(Q) can be calculated, i.e. delay(P)−delay(Q)=S*|QP|. This delay difference is henceforth denoted as Δ(P, Q). S can be calculated in terms of the slope of the delay functions on each of the primary axes of the space in which the points reside. If vector V is the vector whose coordinates are these slopes, the expression for the delay difference becomes: Δ(P, Q)=V_QP.
Note that vector V points in the direction of maximum slope at Q. To determine vector V, the cached points near Q are used. For each such Qm near Q, the slope of the delay function along vector QmQ can be readily computed:
Slope=(delay(Q)−delay(Qm))/|QmQ|
Using these delay slopes, a modified Gram-Schmidt Orthonormalization routine is applied to calculate the slope of the delay function along each of the primary axes, resulting in the slope vector V.
Once vector V is calculated, the difference in delay is computed, i.e. Δ(P, Q)=V_QP. Note that Δ(P, Q) can be computed even if some of the coordinates of vector V are unknown. Specifically, the coordinates of vector V for the axes for which vector QP is null, are not needed. Once Δ(P, Q) has been calculated, the resulting waveform S(P) can be derived from the waveform S(Q). There is a direct relationship between the use of cached results and the reduction of run time for delay calculation on a design. For example, if half of the simulations can be avoided by use of cached results, then there is virtually a 50% run time reduction. Each of the four cache retrieval levels offer different expected accuracy, those being within 1%, 3%, 6%, and 10% of simulation respectively.
Table 2 shows the timing analysis results for the ISCAS-85 benchmarks and three industrial circuits. The gate-level ISCAS-85 benchmarks were mapped to transistor level using a sample library. The remaining circuits are transistor-level custom blocks: a portion of a data-path block (ckt1), an ALU (ckt2), and a large multiplier (ckt3). Transistor count for each circuit is given in the table. A full timing analysis was performed for each circuit. Included in the table are the run times in seconds (RunT) and the longest path delays in nanoseconds (Delay) obtained with caching levels 0 (no caching), 2 and 4. Notice that the run time goes down on average by 40% for caching level 2, with the maximum reduction being 96% for c6288, which has a very regular structure consisting of a 2-D array of full adders. The average run time reduction is 47% for caching level 4, with the maximum reduction being, again, 96% for c6288. The run time reduction is generally higher for larger circuits, indicating the effectiveness of the cache. As for the path delays, the level 2 results are on average within 0.19% of those of level 0, with the maximum difference being 4%. The level 4 results are on average within 0.25% of those of level 0, with the maximum difference being 6%. These results illustrate that the accuracy loss due to caching is minimal.
Experiments were also performed to compare the accuracy of EMU2 against a commercial SPICE simulator. For each circuit, the longest path identified with EMU2 was simulated with SPICE using the worst-case conditions as described above. The EMU2 calculated path delays were found to differ from SPICE by less than 1%. Given the speed advantage of EMU2 over SPICE, it is clear that the proposed method results in considerable reduction in computational effort with a minimal loss in accuracy.
Although the invention is described herein with reference to the preferred embodiment, one skilled in the art will readily appreciate that other applications may be substituted for those set forth herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. Accordingly, the invention should only be limited by the claims included below.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5802349 | Rigg et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5831869 | Ellis et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5946475 | Burks et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
6453443 | Chen et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6473881 | Lehner et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6499129 | Srinivasan et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6588000 | Gutwin et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6807520 | Zhou et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6829755 | Gutwin et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
20030033583 | Gutwin et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20030115035 A1 | Jun 2003 | US |