Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --1-- Requirements for Models of Achievable Routing Andrew B. Kahng, UCLA Stefanus Mantik, UCLA Dirk Stroobandt, Ghent.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --1-- Requirements for Models of Achievable Routing Andrew B. Kahng, UCLA Stefanus Mantik, UCLA Dirk Stroobandt, Ghent."— Presentation transcript:

1 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --1-- Requirements for Models of Achievable Routing Andrew B. Kahng, UCLA Stefanus Mantik, UCLA Dirk Stroobandt, Ghent Univ. Supported by Cadence Design Systems, Inc. and the MARCO Gigascale Silicon Research Center

2 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --2-- Outline Models of achievable routing Review of existing models Validation of models through experiments! Experimental analysis of assumptions Future model requirements Conclusions

3 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --3-- –wirelength estimation models (Donath, …) –actual placement information Models of achievable routing Required versus available resources

4 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --4-- Models of achievable routing Required versus available resources limited by routing efficiency factor  r

5 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --5-- Models of achievable routing Required versus available resources limited by power/ground (signal net fraction s i )

6 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --6-- Models of achievable routing Required versus available resources limited by via impact factor v i (ripple effect) utilization factor U i (available / supplied area)

7 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --7-- Use of achievable routing models Optimizing interconnect process parameters for future designs (number of layers, wire width and pitch per layer,...) With given layer characteristics: predict the number of layers needed If number of layers fixed: oracle “(not) routable!” (SUSPENS, GENESYS, RIPE, BACPAC, GTX) Supplying objectives that guide layout tools to promising solutions (wire planning)

8 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --8-- Validation is key Models must be accurate, must support empirical verification and calibration No existing model is validated with real place-and-route data Our work concentrates on validation: –understanding reasons for validation gap –processes for model validation –improvements needed in future models

9 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --9-- Review of existing models Sai-Halasz [Proc. IEEE, 1995] –power/ground: s i 20% –routing efficiency:  r = 40% –via impact: each layer blocks 15% on layers below with same pitch –model is widely used –model is rather pessimistic

10 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --10-- Review of existing models (cont.) Chong and Brayton [SLIP, 1999] –layer assignment model layer pairs form tiers (H and V) wires are routed on 1 tier shorter wires on lower tiers –available resources model constant routing efficiency for all layers:  r = 65% via impact factor v i based on actual via area –each wire uses 2 via stacks (block wires on lower layers) –total number of wires per layer (thus vias) defined by layer assignment model H H V V } } tier

11 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --11-- Review of existing models (cont.) Chen et al. [private communication, 1999] –layer assignment model similar to Chong’s –available resources model constant routing efficiency (40% <  r < 66%) via impact model –terminal vias and turn vias –each wire uses 2 via stacks –number of terminal vias defined by layer assignment model –sparse via model = Chong –dense via model: give up 1 track every X tracks –results in via impact proportional to sqrt(Chong’s impact factor) H H V V } } tier tracks

12 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --12-- Model validation Models can be validated only by testing against comparable experimental results –none of reviewed models was validated –even simple comparison: huge differences 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 01345 Via fill rate (%) Utilization factor/layer (%) Sai-Halasz (M4) Sai-Halasz (M1) Chong Chen Sai-Halasz (M3) Sai-Halasz (M2)

13 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --13-- Model validation (cont.) Experimental validation –Typical industry standard-cell block design 42.000 cells, 1999, 5 layers Cadence placement and gridded routing tools same pitch (1  m) for all layers via size.62  m all pins for cells are on M1 Experimental validation –ensure congested design Via fill rate (%) Utilization factor (%) Sai-Halasz (M4) Sai-Halasz (M1) Chong Chen Sai-Halasz (M3) Sai-Halasz (M2) 75 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 70 Exp M2 0123465 Exp M4 Exp M3

14 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --14-- Model validation (cont.) Experimental validation –adding virtual vias on M3 and M4 (effect of wires on virtual upper layers) Exp M4 Exp M3 Via fill rate (%) Utilization factor (%) Sai-Halasz (M4) Sai-Halasz (M1) Chong Chen Sai-Halasz (M3) Sai-Halasz (M2) 75 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 70 Exp M2 0123465

15 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --15-- Model validation (cont.) Predictions for future designs –number of layers >>, die size >> –via impact severely underestimated –predicted limits on number of layers too high Via fill rate (%) Utilization factor (%) Chong Chen 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 M4 M3 01020304050

16 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --16-- Model validation (cont.) Predictions for future designs LayerChongChenExperiment M17126630973113452 M227562023585 M3009894 M4000 Total9882830973146931 Layers needed224 Number of terminal vias

17 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --17-- Outline Models of achievable routing Review of existing models Validation of models through experiments! Experimental analysis of assumptions Future model requirements Conclusions

18 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --18-- Routing efficiency Constant over all layers? Via fill rate (%) Utilization factor (%) Chong Chen 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 M4 M3 01020304050

19 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --19-- Routing efficiency Are we measuring routing efficiency or inefficiency? –thought experiment given placement of given netlist route with very good router, measure U i route again with very bad router, measure U i –which one has better routing efficiency? –which one has higher utilization factor? –Give credit for completing nets, not for using metal (use Steiner length instead of actual length for U i )!

20 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --20-- Layer assignment assumptions shorter wires on lower tiers / wires on 1 tier Actual Length (%) Actual Number of Layers Steiner Length (  m)

21 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --21-- Real Wiring Effects Cascade/ripple effect Effect of vias depends on wire length Proposal: l+1 intersections

22 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --22-- Real Wiring Effects (cont.) A simple proposal –probability wire is not blocked: –via impact factor: Via fill rate (%) Utilization factor (%) Chong Chen 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 M4 M3 01020304050 Model M3Model M4

23 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --23-- Conclusion Better/more accurate models needed –understanding routing efficiency –layer assignment model allows >1 tier/wire –via impact based on real wiring effects wirelength on layer is important cascade/ripple effect Experimental verification of models a must! There is a lot of work yet to be done

24 ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --24-- Constant via impact factor Utilization factor constant? LayerSai-HalaszU i /U i+1 M1/M20.850.07 M2/M30.850.56 M3/M40.851.10 M3/M4 Utilization factor ratio Via fill rate (%)


Download ppt "ISPD 2000, San DiegoApr 10, 2000 --1-- Requirements for Models of Achievable Routing Andrew B. Kahng, UCLA Stefanus Mantik, UCLA Dirk Stroobandt, Ghent."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google