Design Article
Comment
OphirT
The first big difference is that at the end of the suggested flow you have ...
WiLess
An interesting idea and really helpful. What would be the differences of this ...
Speeding power estimation from weeks to hours
Ophir Turbovich, Cambridge Silicon Radio and Thomas Li, SpringSoft
11/19/2012 10:59 AM EST
Generating a gate-level simulation environment is a very high effort task because of naming mismatches between synthesis and simulation. Synthesis is often performed at a different RTL interface than that used by simulation. Since signal names are not maintained during synthesis, the process of matching the new interface to the previous interface is a tedious, time-consuming manual task. Moreover, after place and route, the interface can change completely, making the task even harder.
In addition, this traditional approach produces a waveform that always requires simulation to be run from time zero. This not only results in long simulation run times; it also makes it necessary for the design team to locate cycles that are relevant to the power estimation task. Given that gate transfer level (GTL) waveform files are large and complex, manually locating the relevant cycles is very time-consuming.
Because of the long simulation runtimes, the considerable effort to match and debug the naming, and the effort required to locate power-relevant simulation cycles, many design teams perform gate-level simulation only at the final stage of the project. This is far too late in the flow to optimize power effectively and efficiently. Indeed, many design teams abandon power analysis before its completion — they simply run out of time.


WiLess
11/26/2012 2:08 PM EST
An interesting idea and really helpful. What would be the differences of this flow compared to the flow when RTL VCD along with gate-level netlist is loaded into Primetime PX and tool propagates RTL activities into gate nodes?
Sign in to Reply
OphirT
11/28/2012 3:00 AM EST
The first big difference is that at the end of the suggested flow you have waveform file that you can use for other needs too (and other tools too)…
Also – while working with PTPX with RTL VCD you must make sure that only Flip-Flops are mapped between RTL to netlist. Usually more than Flip-Flops are mapped, and since the RTL simulation is zero delay simulation, the propagation is not done well (and the results are not accurate). It is mostly critical and problematic around adders and multipliers, but not only.
The suggested flow can overcome partial design – RTL which contain stubs or other testbench that replace part of the RTL. You can’t overcome this in PTPX.
In general – you must be PTPX expert to be able to run with RTL VCD, and it is not accurate. In the SpringSoft flow anyone can generate netlist VCD/SAIF, and no need to be an expert to run it on PTPX.
Another issue – PTPX runs in this mode taking too much time. While generating GTL waveform in the new flow took about 1 hour, and the total power estimation was 2 hours, using this on PTPX (when it can be done) took more than 24 hours.
Sign in to Reply