LVS problem

Discussion in 'Cadence' started by Kuan Zhou, Apr 22, 2005.

  1. Kuan Zhou

    Kuan Zhou Guest

    Hi,

    I have a huge layout now. The LVS takes a really really long time to
    finish. Is there any ways to speed it up? Can LVS igore some blocks in the
    layout and only check the rest of the entire layout? Can it be done in the
    hierarchy editor?

    Thank you very much!

    Kuan
     
    Kuan Zhou, Apr 22, 2005
    #1
  2. Kuan,

    It's important you say which LVS tool you're using. Any answer is likely to be
    different depending on which verification tool set you're using.

    It could be Diva, Dracula, Assura, Calibre, Hercules or others...

    Regards,

    Andrew.
     
    Andrew Beckett, Apr 22, 2005
    #2
  3. Kuan Zhou

    Kuan Zhou Guest

    Hi,

    I am using Diva. I also have Assura available. Sorry for the
    confusion.

    Kuan
     
    Kuan Zhou, Apr 22, 2005
    #3
  4. Kuan Zhou

    jayl-news Guest

    If you have Assura available, that is surely the way to
    go. If your hierarchy is at all reasonable, your LVS
    (and DRC) will be many times faster than Diva, without
    ignoring any data.

    -Jay-
     
    jayl-news, Apr 22, 2005
    #4
  5. Kuan Zhou

    Kuan Zhou Guest

    Hi,

    But I have around 1 million transsitors. Even Assura I guess will take
    a long time to finish.
    When I thought is to ask the LVS tool to ignore some blocks in the LVS
    if these blocks have been proved to be correct. The LVS tool will only
    use the pins in these blocks for checking. I am not sure whether it's
    doable because seems nobody did such a huge layout before. I am wondering
    how CPU is designed. Intel never does LVS on the top level design?

    Kuan
     
    Kuan Zhou, Apr 24, 2005
    #5
  6. Kuan Zhou

    G Vandevalk Guest

    Run macro LVS.

    (carefully in sync with macro extract
    ... and then only to fix the lower level lvs issues
    .... then run flat!)

    Note that in macro extract, you need to create pins.
    You can override the macro with properties (RTM)

    You must exactly match the hierachy at the levels you describe.

    and remember that Cadence Extract does not catch connectivity across
    the hierachy except at pins. (Which is why you run flat a the end)

    -- G
     
    G Vandevalk, Apr 24, 2005
    #6
  7. Hi Kuan,

    But Assura will take advantage of the hierarchy to avoid repeating checks
    on cells already checked.

    A million transistors is an awful lot for Diva!

    Andrew.
     
    Andrew Beckett, Apr 25, 2005
    #7
  8. Kuan Zhou

    jayl-news Guest

    The last time I taped out a chip that small with Assura, the LVS run
    time for full-chip was 30 minutes (2.4 GHz P4, Linux).

    The stuff I'm doing recently is about 5M transistors, LVS run time
    about 105 minutes (2.8GHz Xeon, Linux).

    FWIW, I did tape out 1M transistors in Diva, once, years ago in
    ..25um. LVS runtime was about 20 hours (750MHz USIII). We were
    very grateful it ran to completion. :)
    "Blackbox" LVS is doable in Diva (I've never done it myself) and
    straightforward in Assura (I have done it there, in situations
    where the contents of said box didn't exist yet!).

    If you have Assura, and any reasonable hierarchy in your design
    at all, you're in good shape. 1M transistors is medium-sized.

    -Jay-
     
    jayl-news, Apr 26, 2005
    #8
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.