A strange question in drc check.

Discussion in 'Cadence' started by tech11, Jul 19, 2007.

  1. tech11

    tech11 Guest

    Hello everyone,

    I'm running one drc check with dracula but worried by a strange question.

    The layout view is simple, which including one HV polygon and diffusion one.
    There're some external separation and enclosing violations in the view. The
    following is the part of the rule file:

    ;************************************
    ; *** HV Layer ***
    ;************************************
    ENC[TO] DIFF HV LT 1.2 OUTPUT E3AH 45
    EXT[TO] HV DIFF LT 1.2 OUTPUT E3BH 45
    ENC[TO] PO1 HV LT 0.8 OUTPUT E3CLH 45
    ;
    ;***********************************
    ; *** PO1 Layer ***
    ;***********************************
    WIDTH PO1 LT 0.8 OUTPUT E4ALH 45
    EXT[H] PO1 LT 1.2 OUTPUT E4BLH 45
    EXT[TO] PO1 DIFF LT 0.8 OUTPUT E4CLH 45
    ;

    The purpose is to check out those violations. But the above rule cannot do
    it, unless I do any item in these modification:
    1. Add one poly1 polygon in the layout view;
    2. Comment the line 'ENC[TO] PO1 HV LT 0.8 OUTPUT E3CLH 45'
    3. Comment the line 'WIDTH PO1 LT 0.8 OUTPUT E4ALH 45'
    4. Comment the line 'EXT[H] PO1 LT 1.2 OUTPUT E4BLH 45'

    Since layer 'HV', 'PO1' and 'DIFF' are all original layer, layer 'PO1'
    should not have more effection to rule E3AH45 and E3BH45, but I have no way
    to understand the above behavior. Who may kindly give me some advice?

    BTW, I've tried to convert the rule file to calibre format without any other
    modification, calibre can sign out the errors.

    Thanks for your help!

    B.R.

    Joffre
     
    tech11, Jul 19, 2007
    #1
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.