Analysis on Impact of Behavioral Modeling in Performance of Synthesis Process

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 178)

Abstract

Cell-based design techniques, such as standard-cells and FPGAs, together with versatile hardware synthesis are rudiments for a high productivity in ASIC design. Several monumental changes have occurred in the design structure and execution of electronics principles. In the design process the functionality is defined through Hardware Description Language. The principal feature of a HDL is that it contains the capability to describe the function of hardware independent of implementation. Generally HDL coding styles can have a significant effect on the quality of results and also has the greatest effect on the performance of any event-driven simulator, and is often obvious. Synthesis tools optimize HDL code for both logic utilization and performance of an intended design. This paper focuses how an inefficient coding style can adversely impact synthesis and simulation, resulting in slow circuits, and rectification method to balance between the quality of the end hardware and optimized coding style that boost performance issues. The module functionality are described using Verilog HDL and performance issues like slice utilized, simulation time, percentage of logic utilization, level of logic are analyzed at 90 nm process technology using SPARTAN6 XC6SLX150 XILINX ISE12.1 tool.

Keywords

Verilog Hardware Description Language (HDL) Synthesis Event driven simulator Logic Utilization 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Uma, R.: Qualitative Analysis of Hardware Description Languages: VHDL and Verilog (IJCSIS). International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security 9(4), 127–135 (2011)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Uma, R., Dhavachelvan, P.: Performance of Adders with Logical Optimization in FPGA. In: First Interantional Conference on Signal, Image Processing and Pattern Recognition (SPRR 2012) (accepted 2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Douglas, C., Smith, J.: VHDL and VERILOG Compared and Contrasted – Plus Modeled Example Written in VHDL, VerilogGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schwarz, P.: Physically oriented modeling of heterogeneous systems. In: Proc. 3rd IMACS Symp. Math. Model., February 2-4, vol. 1, pp. 309–318 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cordero, R.L., Salavert, I.R.: Using Styles to Improve the Architectural Views Design. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA 2006). IEEE Computer Society (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ecker, W., Esen, V., Hull, M.: Impact of Description Language, Abstraction Layer, and Value Representation on Simulation Performance. In: EDAA 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Uma, R., Dhavachelvan, P.: Performance of Full Adder with Skewed Logic. In: International Conference on Advances in Computing and Communications (ACC 2012) (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Steinert, M.: Using SystemC for Hardware Design Comparison of results with VHDL, Cossap and CoCentric. In: Proceedings of the ESNUG 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ebeling, C., French, B.: Abstract Verilog: A Hardware Description Language for Novice Students. In: IEEE International Conference on Microelectronic Systems Education, MSE 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thomas, D., Moorby, P.: The Verilog Hardware Description Language, 5th edn. Kluwer (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Verilog, HDL, A Guide to Digital Design And Synthesis, Samir PalnitkarGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Douglas, C., Smith, J.: VHDL and VERILOG Compared and Contrasted – Plus Modeled Example Written in VHDL, VerilogGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science, School of EngineeringPondicherry UniversityPuducherryIndia

Personalised recommendations