2) Exploit the growing trend of companies with killer app products to leverage system on chip (SoC) designs as a part of their strategy. There are many examples of this trend, including Apple’s iPad, Google’s Android and even Microsoft’s commitment to an SoC-compatible version of Windows. This trend requires significantly improved SoC design by both the system companies making such products and the semiconductor companies supplying to them. These programs need to meet the significant pressures of integrating diverse functionality with lower cost, power, and design times as well as a fast ramp to volume. These are the typical harsh demands of a competitive consumer market.
Both of these requirements are tied to and being driven by the continued adoption and evolution of SoC designs. Although we in EDA have been conversant in the concept of SoC for many years, it is just now truly taking hold in mainstream (read: high growth) markets. SoC is, in essence, the killer app of the semiconductor world, and it will benefit all supply chain members – systems companies, semiconductor suppliers, IP providers and manufacturing specialists. What is also clear is that the potential of SoC lies in the industry’s ability to develop them in a more fluid way. SoC, like ASIC before it, is a business model that allows a democratization for a system company’s access to powerful silicon.
SoC is the new ASIC. It is both a technology and business model. Just like in the 1990’s when ASIC was first being widely introduced by the integrated device manufacturers (IDMs), it was the engine for EDA growth. SoC will be the growth engine for what EDA becomes.
And EDA stands to benefit from that need.
A critical gap exists in today’s SoC development process that threatens to undermine the potential of SoC. On one end, the detailed process for implementing complex designs in advanced silicon is well understood and is served adequately by traditional EDA tools and their tight connection to device physics and manufacturing. On the other end, the process of conceptualizing and analyzing designs at a system level, a high level of abstraction and without the restrictions of physical operating constraints, is also a well-proven, albeit somewhat less rigidly defined area.
Ideally, this system level implementation would be available to software application developers before the SoC is actually manufactured to test and debug the software and uncover any SoC architectural problems. Software is now king and will remain so. The hardware, or SoC, serves the king. As a result, there has been an inversion in the value chain in the last decade from software running on general hardware to software running on specially designed hardware (SoCs) that are optimized for the system software application.
Operating at these two different levels of abstraction, most often performed by two (at least) different sets of operations, introduces a variety of risks and design management challenges. The most fundamental challenge is ensuring that what is intended at the highest level of abstraction actually gets implemented in silicon by the steps performed at lower levels of detail. Thus ensuring architectural intent or design coherence, making sure nothing gets “lost in translation” is a major issue within the current SoC design flow from concept through silicon implementation.