Closed-Loop 1xN Compiler Preserving Physical Optimizations

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current integrated circuit design methodologies employ an open-loop process, leading to disjointed activities that result in lost optimizations during iterations, particularly in physical design phases, as design improvements are not effectively maintained across different design flow stages without manual intervention.

Innovation Solution

A closed-loop 1×N compiler system that generates and maintains behavioral, logical, and physical design representations using 1×N building blocks, allowing for iterative feedback and optimization across design phases, ensuring that physical optimizations are preserved and reused throughout the design flow.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual instantiation of gates and manual changes to synthesis flow are used to maintain physical optimizations, then design improvements can be preserved across iterations, but designer time and effort increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepreservation of physical optimizationsVSAvoiddesigner time for manual optimization
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service by implementing automated feedback loops where the synthesis tool automatically detects and maintains physical optimizations across design iterations without requiring manual intervention. The tool monitors design changes and automatically adjusts synthesis parameters to preserve optimizations in power, area, and timing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The invention implements feedback mechanisms where the synthesis tool continuously monitors design iterations and automatically adjusts synthesis flow parameters based on detected design changes. This feedback loop ensures that physical optimizations are maintained across iterations by automatically updating synthesis constraints and parameters without manual intervention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Ease of manufacture

If fixed one-for-one physical realizations are used for specific logic functions, then design implementation is simplified, but flexibility to optimize performance and power is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedesign implementation simplicityVSAvoidoptimization flexibility
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements dynamics by enabling the synthesis tool to adaptively adjust synthesis parameters and physical realizations based on current design requirements and detected changes. Rather than using fixed one-for-one mappings, the tool dynamically selects and modifies physical implementations to optimize for power, area, and timing based on the specific design context.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The invention applies parameter changes by allowing the synthesis tool to modify synthesis parameters and physical realization characteristics based on detected design changes. The system automatically adjusts parameters such as drive strength, buffering, and cell selection to maintain optimizations while adapting to different design requirements across iterations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If designers manually optimize circuits for power consumption and performance, then design goals can be met, but considerable time is spent on constant updating through design iterations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemeeting design goalsVSAvoiddesign iteration speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service by implementing automated optimization where the synthesis tool independently detects design changes and adjusts synthesis parameters to maintain power, performance, and area optimizations without requiring continuous manual intervention from designers throughout the iteration process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The invention implements continuity of useful action by maintaining continuous monitoring and automatic adjustment of synthesis parameters throughout the design iteration process. The synthesis tool continuously detects design changes and applies appropriate optimizations, ensuring that power and performance goals are maintained without interrupting the design flow for manual re-optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Data Source

PatentUS9558308B2Compiler for closed-loop 1×N VLSI design
Publication Date: 2017.01.31 SIEMENS INDUSTRY SOFTWARE INC
  • US9558308B2 patent drawing
  • US9558308B2 patent drawing
  • US9558308B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Embodiments that design integrated circuits using a 1×N compiler in a closed-loop 1×N methodology are disclosed. Some embodiments create a physical design representation based on a behavioral representation of a design for an integrated circuit. The behavioral representation may comprise RTL HDL with one or more 1×N building blocks. The embodiments may alter elements of the 1×N building block by using logic design tools, synthesis tools, physical design tools, and timing analysis tools. Further embodiments comprise an apparatus having a first generator to generate a behavioral representation of a design for an integrated circuit, a second generator to generate a logical representation of the design, and a third generator to generate a physical design representation of the design, wherein the representation generators may create updated versions of the representations which reflect alterations made to 1×N building block elements.