Automatic inspection method and device
By using automated inspection methods and devices, and by utilizing unified naming rules and constraint documents, the problems of inconsistent naming and time-consuming inspections encountered by engineers when designing electronic systems have been solved, enabling efficient and accurate design rule inspection and correction.
Patent Information
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- MEDIATEK INC
- Filing Date
- 2025-11-18
- Publication Date
- 2026-05-19
AI Technical Summary
In the existing technology, when engineers design electronic systems and integrated circuits, manually checking the schematic connections and layout routes is time-consuming and error-prone, and inconsistent naming conventions lead to designs that do not conform to design rules.
An automatic inspection method and apparatus are provided, which automatically classifies and inspects elements in schematics or layouts using uniform naming rules and constraint files, reports elements that do not conform to the rules, and allows engineers to correct names and connections.
It improves inspection efficiency and accuracy, reduces human error, ensures that designs conform to predefined design rules, saves manpower, and supports rapid error correction.
Smart Images
Figure CN122065753A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] The present invention relates generally to automatic inspection methods and apparatus, and more particularly to automatic inspection methods and apparatus for automatic naming rule inspection, automatic schematic inspection, and automatic layout design inspection based on unified naming rules and / or constraint files. Background Technology
[0002] Electronic Design Automation (EDA) refers to a class of software tools used by electronic designers to design, analyze, and simulate electronic systems and integrated circuits (ICs).
[0003] EDA is crucial for several reasons. Increased complexity: As electronic systems and ICs become increasingly complex, manual design processes become impractical. EDA tools automate many aspects of the design process, enabling designers to efficiently handle complex designs. Time efficiency: EDA tools significantly reduce the time required to design electronic systems. They can automate tasks that might take days or weeks to complete manually, allowing designers to focus on the higher levels of the design. Cost reduction: By automating the design process and minimizing errors, EDA tools help reduce development costs. Faster and more efficient design iterations lead to shorter time-to-market, ultimately reducing production costs. Performance optimization: EDA tools offer a variety of optimization algorithms to improve the performance of electronic systems. These tools can optimize factors such as power consumption, speed, area utilization, and signal integrity. Design verification: EDA tools include robust simulation and verification capabilities to ensure designs meet specifications and functional requirements. They help detect errors and potential problems early in the design process, minimizing costly mistakes.
[0004] In the early stages of designing large-scale test platforms (such as load boards, probe card substrates) or any electronic product (such as printed circuit boards (PCBs) and package substrates), engineers typically need to spend several weeks manually verifying schematic connections and layout routes to conform to design guidelines.
[0005] Currently, there is inconsistency or a lack of standardization in how engineers name the various elements (nets, components, and pins) in their designs. Naming conventions for nets, components, and pins are either random or inherited. "Random" means that the names are chosen arbitrarily without following any specific convention, while "inherited" indicates that the names may be passed down from previous designs without careful consideration or adherence to standardized naming schemes.
[0006] Engineers manually inspect schematic connections (how different components are electrically connected) and layout routes (how the physical traces on the circuit board are arranged) to ensure they conform to design guidelines. This manual inspection process involves visually inspecting each connection and route to catch any errors or deviations from the intended design.
[0007] Engineers may use EDA tools for schematic or place-and-path checks, but they must manually select the dots, components, and pins to be checked each time. This process is time-consuming and prone to oversights. In other words, while engineers use EDA tools to assist the design process, they still need to manually specify which dots, components, and pins should be checked by the EDA tools to comply with design rules and guidelines. This manual selection process can be time-consuming because engineers must individually identify and specify the elements to be checked. Furthermore, the manual nature of this process increases the risk of oversights, potentially leading to undetected errors or violations in the design. Additionally, schematic and place-and-path check results may be inaccurate.
[0008] Therefore, in order to solve the previous problems, an automated inspection method is needed to reduce the workload of engineers and improve the accuracy of inspection results. Summary of the Invention
[0009] According to one embodiment, an automatic inspection method is provided. The automatic inspection method includes: receiving a schematic or layout containing multiple elements; determining whether the multiple elements are classified into corresponding subcategories in the naming rule based on keywords in a naming rule and the names of the multiple elements, wherein the naming rule contains multiple main categories, each main category has multiple subcategories, and each subcategory in each main category has keywords that correspond to predefined design rules; reporting elements with incorrect names, wherein the elements with incorrect names are elements that cannot be classified into the corresponding subcategories; and receiving corrected names for the elements with incorrect names.
[0010] According to another embodiment, an automatic inspection device is provided. The automatic inspection device includes: a processor; and a display connected to the processor. The processor is configured to: receive a schematic or layout containing multiple elements; determine whether the multiple elements are classified into corresponding subcategories in a naming rule based on keywords in the naming rule and the names of the multiple elements, wherein the naming rule contains multiple main categories, each main category has multiple subcategories, and each subcategory in each main category has keywords and corresponds to predefined design rules; report elements with incorrect names on the display, wherein the elements with incorrect names are elements that cannot be classified into the corresponding subcategories; and receive corrected names for the elements with incorrect names. Attached Figure Description
[0011] Figure 1A An automatic inspection method according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0012] Figure 1B An automatic inspection method according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0013] Figure 2 An example of a constraint document according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0014] Figure 3 An automatic naming rule checking method according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0015] Figure 4 The automatic naming rule check result after automatic naming rule check is shown according to one embodiment of this application.
[0016] Figure 5 An automatic schematic inspection method according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0017] Figures 6A to 6E Some representative inspection items according to one embodiment of this application are shown.
[0018] Figure 7 An automatic layout design checking method according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0019] Figures 8A to 8D Some representative layout design check items according to one embodiment of this application are shown.
[0020] Figure 9 A block diagram of an automatic inspection apparatus according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0021] In the following detailed description, numerous specific details are set forth for purposes of explanation in order to provide a thorough understanding of the disclosed embodiments. However, it will be apparent that one or more embodiments may be practiced without these specific details. In other instances, well-known structures and apparatuses are schematically illustrated for the purpose of simplifying the drawings. Detailed Implementation
[0022] The technical terminology of this invention is based on the general definition in the technical field of this invention. If this invention describes or interprets one or more terms, the definition of the term is based on the description or interpretation of this invention. Each disclosed embodiment has one or more technical features. In possible implementations, those skilled in the art will selectively implement some or all of the technical features of any embodiment of this invention, or selectively combine some or all of the technical features of embodiments of this invention.
[0023] Figure 1AAn automatic inspection method according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0024] In step 110, a schematic diagram containing multiple elements is received.
[0025] In step 120, an automatic naming rule check is performed on multiple elements based on the naming rules to report the naming rule check results. If the naming rule check results indicate that an element has an incorrect name, the incorrect name of the element is corrected.
[0026] In step 130, an automatic schematic check is performed on the connections of multiple elements to report the schematic check results. If the schematic check results show that some elements have incorrect connections, an updated schematic with corrected connections is obtained.
[0027] In step 140, an automatic layout design check is performed on the layout of multiple elements to report the layout design check results. If the layout design check results show that an element has an incorrect layout design, the incorrect layout design of the element is corrected.
[0028] Figure 1B An automatic inspection method according to another embodiment of this application is shown.
[0029] In step 1100, a layout containing multiple elements is received.
[0030] In step 1200, an automatic naming rule check is performed on multiple elements based on the naming rules to report the naming rule check results. If the naming rule check results indicate that an element has an incorrect name, the incorrect name of the element is corrected.
[0031] In step 1300, an automatic layout design check is performed on the elements to report the layout design check results. If the layout design check results indicate that an element has an incorrect layout design, the incorrect layout design of the element is corrected.
[0032] In one embodiment of this application, the automatic inspection method and apparatus implement a uniform naming rule or a constraint file as input for use in automatic naming rule inspection, automatic schematic inspection, or automatic layout design inspection processes. Regarding embodiments of this application, some ideas of this application are described below.
[0033] (1) Define naming rules. Naming rules include, for example, but not limited to, a main category (or "category"), multiple subcategories within each main category (also called groups), and specific keywords for each subcategory. This naming rule can be a uniform naming rule or a naming rule in a constraint file.
[0034] (2) In the early design phase, element names were created manually according to naming rules, rather than being randomly named.
[0035] (3) Optionally, keywords and / or subcategories and / or main categories may be added or removed in the constraint file.
[0036] (4) Perform an automatic naming rule check to display the naming rule check results and manually or automatically correct the names of elements with incorrect names.
[0037] (5) Perform automatic schematic check and automatic layout design check based on unified naming rules and / or constraint files.
[0038] (6) Report true violation results for schematic and layout optimization. For example, but not limited to, in one embodiment of this application, the true violation results are displayed on the display device of the automatic inspection apparatus.
[0039] The naming rules can be either a standardized naming convention or a custom naming convention. A detailed description of the naming rules is as follows:
[0040] (1) Description of the unified naming rules:
[0041] A unified naming convention may include a main category (e.g., "Category"), multiple subcategories within each main category, and specific keywords for each subcategory. Each subcategory has its own predefined design rules, which may include, but are not limited to, requirements that elements in this subcategory be electrically connected or coupled to other elements or reference voltages, and layout constraints, such as spacing limits between elements in this subcategory and nearby elements.
[0042] The main categories include, but are not limited to, Net, Pin, and Component. For example, (i) subcategories within the Net category include power, ground, and various types of signal categories (e.g., high-speed signals, low-speed signals); (ii) subcategories within the Pin category include power pins, ground pins, control pins, and others; and (iii) subcategories within the Component category include inductors, capacitors, resistors, etc.
[0043] (2) Flexible modification of unified naming rules:
[0044] Based on engineers' needs, the unified naming rules can be adjusted, modified, or replaced. Engineers can modify the unified naming rules by adding new main categories, subcategories, keywords, etc. For example, engineers can input a new constraint file into the device, which contains newly added main categories and / or subcategories and / or keywords. The device will integrate the contents of the new constraint file into the unified naming rules to update them. Furthermore, engineers can also delete multiple main categories and / or multiple subcategories and / or multiple keywords from the unified naming rules.
[0045] (3) Custom naming rules
[0046] Engineers can provide their own constraint files to the device, containing various main categories and their associated subcategories and keywords to define custom naming rules. That is, custom naming rules can replace the previous uniform naming rules if needed. Engineers can also update or replace the constraint files as needed.
[0047] Figure 2 An example of a constraint document according to an embodiment of this application is shown. Figure 2 As shown, (i) subcategories within the Net category include power, ground, and various signal types (e.g., high-speed signals, low-speed signals); (ii) subcategories within the Pin category include power pins, ground pins, control pins, and others; and (iii) subcategories within the Component category include inductors, capacitors, resistors, etc.
[0048] Figure 3 An automatic naming rule checking method according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0049] In step 310, the device receives a schematic diagram or layout, wherein the elements in the schematic diagram or layout are named by an engineer or designer according to a naming convention. The naming convention contains multiple main categories, each with multiple subcategories, and each subcategory within each main category has a keyword that corresponds to a predefined design rule.
[0050] In step 320, the element names of the schematic or layout are automatically checked according to the naming rules to determine whether the elements are classified into the correct subcategories.
[0051] The naming rules can be the result of adding, deleting, or modifying at least one of the main category, subcategory, and keywords from the unified naming rules. The naming rules can also be custom naming rules based on the input constraint file.
[0052] In step 330, elements with incorrect names are reported, and corrected names for elements with incorrect names are received, wherein elements with incorrect names are elements that cannot be classified into the corresponding subcategory.
[0053] In step 330, the results of the automatic naming rule check are shown so that engineers can manually correct the names of incorrectly named elements until these incorrectly named elements are classified into the correct subcategories.
[0054] Elements in a schematic or layout are named by the designer following naming rules or otherwise. Upon receiving the schematic or layout, the device converts it into text and identifies the main category to which each element should belong based on the text. The text may be in netlist format. The device determines whether an element can be categorized into the corresponding subcategory within the identified main category based on keywords in the naming rules and the element's name (e.g., if an element's name contains keywords of the corresponding subcategory within its main category, the element can be categorized into the corresponding subcategory). The device then compiles the element statistics and displays an error table. Errors indicate elements that cannot be categorized into the correct subcategory. Elements that cannot be categorized into the correct subcategory are determined to have incorrect names. Engineers can subsequently update or correct the names of these incorrectly named elements. The device then performs an automatic naming rule check on the updated or corrected elements until the element is categorized into the correct subcategory based on the naming rules and the element's name.
[0055] This allows for accurate and automated schematic and layout checks by categorizing elements in the schematic or layout into the correct subcategories.
[0056] Figure 4 The results of an automatic naming rule check according to an embodiment of this application are shown. Figure 4 Several tables are shown for each main category, where the table for the main category includes subcategories and the number of elements in each subcategory. Furthermore, Figure 4 An error table is displayed, indicating elements that cannot be classified into the correct subcategory. Specifically, the error table includes a main category and the number of elements with incorrect names within that main category. After an engineer clicks on a main category within the error table or on numbers 410, 420, and 430 within the error table, the device displays the elements with incorrect names within that main category. The engineer can then correct the names of these incorrectly named elements until they are classified into the correct subcategory.
[0057] An automatic schematic check is described according to one embodiment of this application. Based on naming rules, an automatic check of the logical connections of the schematic netlist is developed. In the automatic schematic check of one embodiment of this application, naming rules are used to automatically identify the subcategories of the main category to which an element belongs, based on the element's name. The automatic schematic check automatically checks whether predefined design rules of the subcategories to which elements belong are satisfied.
[0058] Figure 5 An automatic schematic inspection method according to an embodiment of this application is shown.
[0059] In step 520, an automatic schematic check is performed on the elements of the schematic according to the naming rules to automatically check the connections of the elements. The subcategory to which an element belongs is determined based on the name of the element, and the predefined design rules of the determined subcategory are used to check whether the connections of the elements or the relationship between the elements and other elements meet the predefined design rules of the determined subcategory.
[0060] Specifically, the device identifies the main category to which each element belongs based on the text format of the schematic diagram, and then classifies each element into a corresponding subcategory within the identified main category according to naming rules or constraint files. This arrangement determines the subcategory to which an element belongs.
[0061] In step 520, the device can categorize the elements of the schematic into corresponding subcategories according to naming rules. The device performs schematic checks on the required subcategories. The required subcategories are those that need to be checked. These required subcategories can be selected by the engineer. With this arrangement, only the required subcategories are checked, without checking all elements in the main category.
[0062] In step 520, the device can automatically check whether the required sub-category power / ground pins are correctly connected to the voltage source / ground grid points. The device can automatically check whether the required sub-category power pins are correctly connected to the capacitors. The device can automatically check whether the I / O pins of the switching elements are correctly connected to the differential pair P / N grid points. The device can automatically check whether the loop-back connections through multiple components (multiplexers (MUX), capacitors, etc.) are correct and generate an accurate mapping table. The device can automatically check whether the device under test (DUT) pins are correctly connected to the tester pins through multiple components and generate an accurate mapping table.
[0063] In step 530, the automatic schematic check results are presented to the engineer for manual correction of connection errors. If an element's connection fails to meet the predefined design rules of a subcategory, or if the relationship between an element and other elements fails to meet the predefined design rules of the subcategory, then the element's connection is incorrect. The element's connection will be manually corrected by the engineer until it meets the predefined design rules of the subcategory.
[0064] Figures 6A to 6E Some representative inspection items according to embodiments of this application are shown, but this application is not limited thereto. Automated inspections result in faster runtime and report of genuine violations for quick remediation.
[0065] exist Figure 6A In this method, the element is automatically identified as belonging to the Ground subcategory within the main category "Pin" based on its PinName (i.e., the element's name). According to predefined design rules for pins in the Ground subcategory, these rules require that pins in the Ground subcategory be connected to elements in the GND subcategory within the main category "Net". Therefore, the method automatically checks whether the pin is correctly connected to an element in the GND subcategory within the main category "Net". If a pin connection error is detected, the engineer can manually correct the error and perform an automatic schematic check again to ensure there are no connection errors.
[0066] exist Figure 6B In this method, the element automatically determines whether it belongs to the power pin subcategory within the main category "Pin". According to predefined design rules for pins in the power pin subcategory, pins in this subcategory should be connected to capacitors. The method checks whether the pins are correctly connected to the capacitors. If a connection error is detected, the engineer can manually correct the error and perform an automatic schematic check again to ensure there are no connection errors.
[0067] exist Figure 6C-1 and Figure 6C-2In this method, the I / O ports A0+ / A0-, B0+ / B0-, and C0+ / C0- of the switching element are automatically determined to belong to the differential pin subcategory within the main category "Pin" based on their PinNames. Predefined design rules for differential pins require that A0+, B0+, and C0+ pins be connected to signals representing the same polarity, such as positive, while A0-, B0-, and C0- should be connected to signals representing the same polarity, such as negative. The method automatically checks whether the I / O ports A0+ / A0-, B0+ / B0-, and C0+ / C0- of the switching element are correctly connected to the correct signals. If a connection error is detected, the engineer can manually correct the error and perform an automatic schematic check again to ensure there are no connection errors.
[0068] exist Figure 6D In this method, by using unified naming rules and / or constraint files, the method can automatically check whether the loop connections through multiple components (multiplexers, capacitors, etc.) are correct and generate an accurate mapping table. If a loop connection error is detected, the error can be corrected and an automatic schematic check can be performed again to ensure that there are no connection errors. The method automatically determines whether the pin “APU_TX(3)” belongs to the high-speed signal pin subcategory in the main category “Pin” based on the PinName. The method checks whether the connection of the pin “APU_TX(3)” is correct according to the predefined design rules of the high-speed signal pin subcategory in the main category “Pin”. If a connection error of the pin “APU_TX(3)” is detected, the engineer can manually correct the error and perform an automatic schematic check again to ensure that there are no connection errors. This can prevent human error.
[0069] exist Figure 6E This method automatically checks whether DUT pins are correctly connected to tester pins via multiple components (multiplexers, capacitors, etc.) and generates an accurate mapping table. The method determines the subcategory of a DUT pin based on its name, the subcategory of a MUX pin based on its name, and the subcategory of the names of signals between MUX and DUT pins, or between two DUT pins, based on the names of those signals. The method checks the correct connection of DUT and MUX pins according to predefined design rules for each subcategory. If a connection error is detected, the engineer can manually correct it and perform an automatic schematic check again to ensure there are no connection errors. This prevents human error.
[0070] An automatic layout design check according to one embodiment of this application is described.
[0071] In one embodiment of this application, layout and routing are automatically checked based on design criteria. Automatic layout design checks can be repeatedly applied to various layout designs based on a product line. In the automatic layout design check of one embodiment of this application, a uniform naming rule or constraint file is used to automatically identify the sub-category of the main category to which the element belongs based on the element's name; and based on the predefined design rules of the identified sub-category, it is determined whether the element's layout meets the predefined design rules of the identified sub-category. If a layout error is found, the element's layout is corrected until the element's layout meets the predefined design rules of the identified sub-category.
[0072] Figure 7 An automatic layout design checking method according to one embodiment of this application is shown.
[0073] In step 720, an automatic layout design check is performed on the element layout according to the naming rules, wherein the element's sub-category is determined based on the element's name, and the predefined design rules of the sub-category are used to check whether the element layout is correct.
[0074] In step 720, the device can classify the elements of the layout into corresponding subcategories according to naming rules. The device performs a layout design check on the required subcategories. The required subcategories are those that need to be checked for layout design. The required subcategories can be selected by the engineer. With this arrangement, only the required subcategories can be checked, without checking all elements in the main category.
[0075] In this step, the device can automatically check whether there is a grounding via V1 within a specified radius of the high-speed signal via V2. The device can automatically check whether the spacing between signal lines in the required signal line subclass meets the requirements. The device can automatically check whether the resistance from the required starting point through at least one component to the ending point in the layout meets the requirements. The device can automatically check the keep-out zone (KOZ) of the required components in the layout.
[0076] In step 730, the results of the automatic layout design check are shown so that engineers can manually correct errors in the elements (e.g., incorrect element design rules).
[0077] Figures 8A to 8D Some representative layout design check items according to embodiments of this application are shown, but this application is not limited thereto. Automated checks result in faster runtime and report of genuine violations for quick remediation.
[0078] Elements in a schematic correspond to elements in a layout; for example, signal elements in a schematic correspond to traces or vias in a layout. Figure 8AIn one possible example, the automatic layout design check method automatically identifies vias in the layout that correspond to the first element of the schematic, where the first element is categorized into the high-speed signal subcategory within the main category "dots" based on its name. Predefined design rules for the high-speed signal subcategory can specify that ground vias must be within the defined radius of the high-speed signal via. The method checks whether a ground via V1 exists within the specified radius of the high-speed signal via V2. In this way, engineers can manually correct errors and perform the automatic layout design check again to ensure there are no design rule errors.
[0079] exist Figure 8B In this approach, the automatic layout design check method automatically determines the subcategories of elements based on their names, and predefined design rules for these subcategories are used to check the correctness of the element layout. For example, ... Figure 8B As shown, the spacing between signal lines 810 and 820 is less than the minimum spacing, which violates the predefined design rules for the signal line subcategories 810 and 820, and is flagged as a true violation warning 815. Similarly, the spacing between signal lines 830 and 840 is less than the minimum spacing, which violates the predefined design rules for the signal line subcategories 830 and 840, and is flagged as a true violation warning 835. This allows engineers to manually correct the errors and then perform an automatic layout design check again to ensure there are no design rule errors.
[0080] exist Figure 8C-1 and Figure 8C-2 In this system, the automatic layout design check method automatically determines the subcategory of elements based on their names and uses predefined design rules for that subcategory to check the correctness of the element layout. For example, the predefined design rules for a subcategory might require that the resistance in the layout from the required starting point through at least one component (multiplexer, relay, resistor, etc.) to the ending point (e.g., from a DUT pin to a tester pin) must meet resistance requirements. When the resistance in the layout from this required starting point through at least one component to the ending point does not meet the resistance requirements, a true violation is marked. In response to a true violation, the resistance in the layout is adjusted manually or automatically until the resistance requirements are met. In this way, engineers can manually correct errors and perform an automatic layout design check again to ensure that there are no design rule errors.
[0081] exist Figure 8DIn this paper, the automatic layout design check method automatically determines a specific component subcategory based on the element name, and then checks for dots that violate the predefined design rules of that specific component subcategory (i.e., no other dots should exist in the reserved area except for those connected to the element, to prevent signal interference with the component). In circuit design layout, the Keep-Out Zone (KOZ) refers to the area on the printed circuit board (PCB) where components or traces are not allowed to be placed. In one embodiment of this application, if the predefined design rules of the specific component subcategory are violated, it is marked as a true violation. In response to a true violation, the engineer will manually remove any other dots in the KOZ except for those connected to the element until the KOZ requirements are met. Figure 8D This displays the design rules based on subcategories, checking whether the KOZ (Knowledgeable Zones) on the same layer and on adjacent layers are satisfied. This allows engineers to manually correct errors and then perform an automatic layout design check again to ensure no design rule errors exist.
[0082] Figure 9 A block diagram of an automatic inspection apparatus according to an embodiment of this application is shown. The automatic inspection apparatus 900 includes a processor 910, a memory 920, and a display 930. The processor 910 is connected to the memory 920 and the display 930. The memory 920 is used to store constraint files or uniform naming rules. The display 930 is used to display inspection results. The processor 910 is used to execute the automatic inspection method described above based on the embodiment of this application. The memory may be integrated into the processor or separate from the processor. The processor 910 may be implemented, for example, as a chip, a circuit block in a chip, firmware circuitry, or a circuit board having multiple electronic components and lines.
[0083] The automatic inspection method and apparatus based on the embodiments of this application have several advantages over the prior art. For example, but not limited to, the automatic inspection method and apparatus based on the embodiments of this application have the following advantages: (1) the uniform naming rules or constraint files can be reused for various schematic and layout designs; (2) more accurate results than EDA methods; (3) saving manpower; (4) scalable to develop more automatic inspection items to achieve better coverage.
[0084] In this embodiment, engineers follow naming rules (uniform naming rules or constraint documents). Therefore, engineers can adhere to the naming rules for dots, components, and pins in the schematic. The device can automatically categorize elements in the schematic or layout into the correct subcategories.
[0085] The foregoing primarily describes the solutions provided in the embodiments of this application. It is understood that, to achieve the above functions, the automatic inspection device includes corresponding hardware structures and / or software modules to perform the functions. Those skilled in the art will readily recognize that, in conjunction with the units and algorithm steps described in the embodiments disclosed in this specification, this application can be implemented in hardware or in a combination of hardware and computer software. Whether the function is executed by hardware or by hardware driven by computer software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Those skilled in the art can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered beyond the scope of this application.
[0086] While this application may describe numerous details, these details should not be construed as limiting the scope of the claimed invention or any potentially claimed content, but rather as descriptions of features of particular embodiments. Certain features described in the context of separate embodiments may also be implemented in combinations of individual embodiments. Conversely, individual features described in a single embodiment may also be implemented separately in multiple embodiments, or in any suitable sub-combination. Furthermore, although the foregoing features may be described as functioning in certain combinations, or even initially claimed so, in some cases one or more features may be removed from the claimed combination, and the claimed combination may refer to a sub-combination or a variation of a sub-combination. Similarly, although operations are shown in a specific order in the figures, this should not be construed as requiring these operations to be performed in the order shown or sequentially, or requiring all shown operations to achieve the desired result.
Claims
1. An automatic checking method executed by a processor, characterized in that, include: Receives a schematic or layout containing multiple elements; Based on the keywords in the naming rules and the names of multiple elements, determine whether the multiple elements are classified into the corresponding subcategories in the naming rules, wherein the naming rules contain multiple main categories, each main category has multiple subcategories, and each subcategory in each main category has a keyword and corresponds to a predefined design rule; Report elements with incorrect names, wherein the elements with incorrect names are those that cannot be classified into the corresponding subcategory; as well as Receive the corrected name of the element whose name is incorrect.
2. The automatic inspection method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The steps for determining whether the multiple elements are classified into the corresponding subcategories in the naming rules based on the keywords in the naming rules and the names of the multiple elements include: The corresponding main category of the plurality of elements is determined based on the text converted from the schematic or the layout; and Based on the keywords in the naming rules and the names of the multiple elements, it is determined whether the multiple elements are classified into the corresponding sub-category of the determined main category.
3. The automatic inspection method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Before determining whether the multiple elements are classified into the corresponding subcategories in the naming rules based on the keywords and names of the multiple elements in the naming rules, the method further includes: adjusting or modifying the naming rules by adding or deleting at least one of the main category, subcategory, and keywords in the naming rules, wherein determining whether the multiple elements are classified into the corresponding subcategories in the naming rules includes: determining whether the multiple elements are classified into the corresponding subcategories in the adjusted or modified naming rules.
4. The automatic inspection method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The naming rules are a unified naming rule applicable to multiple schematics.
5. The automatic inspection method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The naming rules are input in a constraint file, which contains multiple main categories, multiple subcategories associated with each main category, and keywords corresponding to each subcategory.
6. The automatic inspection method according to claim 5, characterized in that, Different schematics correspond to different constraint files.
7. The automatic inspection method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Further includes: Automatic schematic check of the connections of multiple elements is performed based on predefined design rules for subcategories of multiple elements to generate schematic check results; as well as If the schematic check result indicates that the connection of an element does not meet the predefined design rules of the corresponding subcategory, then the connection of the element is corrected until the predefined design rules of the corresponding subcategory are met.
8. The automatic inspection method according to claim 7, characterized in that, The steps for automatically checking the connections of multiple elements based on predefined design rules for subcategories of multiple elements include: According to the naming rules, multiple elements are classified into corresponding subcategories; and Perform automatic schematic checks on the required subcategories, where the required subcategories refer to the subcategories that need to be checked in schematics.
9. The automatic inspection method according to claim 7, characterized in that, The plurality of elements includes a first element and a second element, wherein the first element is a pin and the second element is a signal connected to the pin; the steps of automatically checking the connection of the plurality of elements according to predefined design rules of the subcategories of the plurality of elements include: The first subcategory to which the pin belongs is determined based on the pin's name; Determine the second subcategory to which the signal belongs based on its name; and Based on the predefined design rules corresponding to the first sub-category and the predefined design rules corresponding to the second sub-category, the connection from the pin to the signal is determined.
10. The automatic inspection method according to claim 7, characterized in that, The plurality of elements include differential input pins of a switching element and differential output pins of a switching element. The differential input pins include positive input pins and negative input pins, and the differential output pins include positive output pins and negative output pins. The differential input pins and differential output pins belong to the differential pin subcategory within the main category of pins; the predefined design rules for the subcategories of the multiple elements include: the positive input pins of the differential input pins and the positive output pins of the differential output pins should be connected to signals representing the same polarity, and the negative input pins of the differential input pins and the negative output pins of the differential output pins should be connected to signals representing the same polarity.
11. The automatic inspection method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, Further includes: Automatic layout design checks are performed on the layout of multiple elements based on predefined subcategories of design rules to generate layout design check results. as well as When the layout design check result indicates that the layout of an element fails to meet the design rules of the corresponding predefined subcategory, the layout of the element is corrected until the layout of the element meets the design rules of the corresponding predefined subcategory.
12. The automatic inspection method as described in claim 11, characterized in that, The steps for automatically checking the layout of multiple elements based on predefined subcategories of design rules to generate layout design check results include: According to the naming rules, multiple elements are classified into corresponding subcategories; and Perform automatic layout design checks on the required subcategories, where the required subcategories are those that need to be checked by the schematic.
13. An automatic inspection device, characterized in that, include: processor; And the display connected to the processor; The processor is configured to receive a schematic diagram with multiple elements; Based on keywords in the naming rules and the names of multiple elements, determine whether the multiple elements are classified into corresponding subcategories in the naming rules, wherein the naming rules contain multiple main categories, each main category has multiple subcategories, and each subcategory in each main category has keywords that correspond to predefined design rules; report elements with incorrect names on the display, wherein the elements with incorrect names are elements that cannot be classified into the corresponding subcategories; and receive the corrected names of the elements with incorrect names.
14. The automatic inspection device as described in claim 13, characterized in that, When determining whether the plurality of elements are classified into the corresponding subcategories in the naming rules, the processor is further configured to: determine the corresponding main category of the plurality of elements based on the text converted from the schematic or the layout; and determine whether the plurality of elements are classified into the corresponding subcategories in the determined main category based on the keywords in the naming rules and the names of the plurality of elements.
15. The automatic inspection device as described in claim 13, characterized in that, The processor is further configured to: adjust or modify the naming rule by adding or deleting at least one of the main category, subcategory, and keywords in the naming rule before determining whether the plurality of elements are classified into the corresponding subcategory in the naming rule based on the keywords and names of the plurality of elements in the naming rule, wherein determining whether the plurality of elements are classified into the corresponding subcategory in the naming rule includes: determining whether the plurality of elements are classified into the corresponding subcategory in the adjusted or modified naming rule.
16. The automatic inspection device as described in claim 13, characterized in that, The naming rule is based on a constraint file that contains multiple main categories, multiple subcategories associated with each main category, and keywords corresponding to each subcategory.
17. The automatic inspection device as described in claim 13, characterized in that, The processor is further configured to: automatically perform schematic checks on the connections of multiple elements according to predefined design rules for subcategories of multiple elements to generate schematic check results; and, in response to the schematic check results indicating that the connections of an element do not meet the predefined design rules for the corresponding subcategories, correct the connections of the element until they meet the predefined design rules for the corresponding subcategories.
18. The automatic inspection device as described in claim 17, characterized in that, When performing automatic schematic checks on the connections of multiple elements, the processor is further configured to: classify the multiple elements into corresponding subcategories according to the naming rules; and perform automatic schematic checks on the required subcategories, wherein the required subcategories refer to the subcategories that need to be schematic checked.
19. The automatic inspection device as described in claim 13, characterized in that, The processor is further configured to: perform automatic layout design checks on the layout of multiple elements according to predefined sub-category design rules of multiple elements to generate layout design check results; and when the layout design check results indicate that the layout of an element fails to meet the design rules of the corresponding predefined sub-category, correct the layout of the element until the layout of the element meets the design rules of the corresponding predefined sub-category.
20. The automatic inspection device as described in claim 19, characterized in that, When performing automatic layout design checks on the layout of multiple elements, the processor is further configured to: classify the multiple elements into corresponding subcategories according to the naming rules; and perform automatic layout design checks on the required subcategories, wherein the required subcategories are the subcategories that need to be checked by schematic.