Closing the Gap Between Electrical and Physical Design: The Layout-Aware Solution
Iterations between separate phases in any procedural design process, usually a by-product of unexpected (or, simply, very complex to consider) adverse effects, clearly play against any time-to-market requirements. In analog integrated circuit (IC) design, going back and forth between electrical and physical synthe- sis to counterbalance layout-induced performance degradations needs to be thus avoided as much as possible. One possible solution involves the integration of the 1 traditionally separated electrical and physical synthesis phases, by including layout- induced effects, in the form of layout parasitics, right into the electrical synthesis phase, in what has been called parasitic-aware synthesis. This solution, as such, is not yet complete since there are geometric requirements (minimization of the occu- pied area or fulfillment of certain layout aspect ratio, among others), whose effects on the resulting parasitics are not usually considered during electrical synthesis. In this chapter, a layout-aware solution that tackles both geometric and parasitic-aware electrical synthesis is proposed. This technique uses a combination of simulation- based optimization, procedural layout generation, exhaustive geometric evaluation algorithms, and several mechanisms for parasitic estimation. Thanks to the nature of this combination, the solution benefits from, and also fosters, reuse of analog intellectual property (IP) blocks. Several detailed design examples are provided.
KeywordsLeaf Node Analog Circuit Area Loss Layout Generation Circuit Sizing
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Int. Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors. [Online]. Available: http://public.itrs.net, 2005.
- 2.MEDEA+ Design Automation Roadmap. [Online]. Available: http://www.medeaplus.org, 2007.
- 4.J. Conway and G. Schrooten, “An automatic layout generator for analog circuits,” in European Design Automation Conference, Mar 1992, pp. 513 – 519.Google Scholar
- 6.N. Jangkrajarng, S. Bhattacharya, and R. Hartono, “IPRAIL – intellectual property reuse-based analog IC layout automation,” Integration, VLSI J., Nov 2003.Google Scholar
- 8.S. Bhattacharya, N. Jangkrajarng, and C. Shi, “Template-driven parasitic-aware optimization of analog integrated circuit layouts,” in ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC), Jun 2005, pp. 644 – 647.Google Scholar
- 9.N. Jangkrajarng, L. Zhang, S. Bhattacharya, N. Kohagen, and C. Shi, “Template-based parasitic-aware optimization and retargeting of analog and RF integrated circuit layouts,” in IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD), Nov 2006, pp. 342 – 348.Google Scholar
- 14.F. Fernández, A. Rodríguez, and J. L. Huertas, Symbolic Analysis Techniques: Applications to Analog Design Automation. IEEE Press, New York, 1997.Google Scholar
- 16.P. Vancorenland, G. V. der Plas, M. Steyaert, G. Gielen, and W. Sansen, “A layout-aware synthesis methodology for RF circuits,” in IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD), Nov 2001, pp. 358 – 362.Google Scholar
- 18.G. Stehr, M. Pronath, F. Schenkel, H. Graeb, and K. Antreich, “Initial sizing of analog integrated circuits by centering within topology-given implicit specifications,” in IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD), Nov 2003, pp. 241 – 246.Google Scholar
- 20.F. Medeiro, A. Pérez-Verdú, and A. Rodríguez-Vázquez, Top-Down Design of High-Performance Sigma-Delta Modulators. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1999.Google Scholar
- 22.H. Chang, E. Liu, R. Neff, E. Felt, and E. Malavasi, Top-Down, Constraint-Driven Design Methodology for Analog Integrated Circuits. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 97.Google Scholar
- 24.K. Lampaert, G. Gielen, and W. Sansen, Analog Layout Generation for Performance and Manufacturability. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1999.Google Scholar
- 25.M. Dessouky and M. Louerat, “A layout approach for electrical and physical design integration of high-performance analog circuits,” in IEEE First International Symposium on Quality Electronic Design (ISQED), Mar 2000, pp. 291 – 298.Google Scholar
- 27.A. Agarwal, H. Sampath, V. Yelamanchili, and R. Vemuri, “Fast and accurate parasitic capacitance models for layout-aware synthesis of analog circuits,” in Design Automation Conference and Test in Europe Conference (DATE), Mar 2004, pp. 145 – 150.Google Scholar
- 28.M. Ranjan, W. Verhaegen, A. Agarwal, H. Sampath, R. Vemuri, and G. Gielen, “Fast, layout-inclusive analog circuit synthesis using pre-compiled parasitic-aware symbolic performance models,” in Design Automation Conference and Test in Europe Conference (DATE), vol. 1, Feb 2004, pp. 604 – 609.Google Scholar
- 29.A. Pradhan and R. Vemuri, “Efficient synthesis of a uniformly spread layout aware pareto surface for analog circuits,” in 22nd International Conference on VLSI Design, Dec 2009, pp. 131 – 136.Google Scholar
- 32.G. Zhang, A. Dengi, R. Rohrer, R. Rutenbar, and L. Carley, “A synthesis flow toward fast parasitic closure for radio-frequency integrated circuits,” in ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC), 2004, pp. 155 – 158.Google Scholar
- 33.Virtuoso Parameterized Cell Reference, 4th ed., Cadence Des. Syst. Inc., San Jose, CA, 2000.Google Scholar
- 34.SKILL Language Reference, 6th ed., Cadence Des. Syst. Inc., San Jose, CA, 2004.Google Scholar
- 35.R. Otten, “Automatic floorplan design,” in ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC), 1982, pp. 261 – 267.Google Scholar
- 36.L. Stockmeyer, “Optimal orientations of cells in slicing floorplan designs.” Inf. Control, vol. 57, no. 2/3, pp. 91 – 101, May/Jun 1983.Google Scholar
- 38.R. Naiknaware and T. Fiez, “Automated hierarchical CMOS analog circuit stack generation with intramodule connectivity and matching considerations,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 304 – 303, Mar 1999.Google Scholar