Breaking News
Comments
Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Neo10
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
Neo10   12/7/2010 4:46:55 AM
NO RATINGS
While most agree that OA has failed in universal acceptance it still has the potential to be leveraged as an Open database standard. In part it depends on Cadence relinquishing some of it's IP rights and others taking up OA and adding to it to make it really unified. Or left to itself the industry will gravitate towards two or three camps of database technologies and face insurmountable problems in the long run. For a start the top EDA companies should come together and come out with some kind of a compromise and hand it over to Accellera or another such independent entity to take it forward.

John McGehee
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
John McGehee   12/9/2010 4:45:12 PM
NO RATINGS
The OpenAccess Coalition Scripting Languages Working Group has Perl, Python, Ruby and Tcl ready for action: http://www.pr-inside.com/new-contributions-ease-adoption-of-r2298621.htm Synopsys did the Tcl binding. I might do C#. Which scripting language did Mentor want? I have made two code contributions to OpenAccess. It's possible but difficult because only Cadence is allowed to change the core database code. To get even a production tested bug fix into OpenAccess, it took well over a year plus pressure from a powerful OpenAccess Coalition member. Magma seems to have done okay with a central database strategy.

John McGehee
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
John McGehee   12/9/2010 5:07:07 PM
NO RATINGS
And as those who attended the OpenAccess Conference in October know, Cadence has started to add multithreading support to OpenAccess. http://si2.org/?page=1282

dhrods
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
dhrods   12/9/2010 7:52:28 PM
NO RATINGS
Linda makes some great observations about the practical realities of Silicon Realization—I think we all agree on the problem although I think there are some misconceptions about the OpenAccess program and progress to date. Cadence believes strongly that a common database is important to the industry and has remained steadfastly committed for the past eight years. Since 2002, Cadence has contributed and maintained more than 90 engineer-years of code at our own expense. We actively participate in the community and provide input to architectural and priority decisions. The community owns OA content. Cadence has no IP rights other than those granted to us by the community. The community leadership is comprised of other major EDA players as well as heavyweight product companies. Cadence works in this community for the good of the industry which in turn benefits Cadence. The community is releasing 22.41, due by the end of 2010, which supports multi-threading. The community has recently released new scripting language bindings for Tcl, Python, and Ruby which are available for beta now. The binding code is designed to be easy for the community to download and support. There are many companies both on the EDA side and the design side that depend on OA every day. These companies are all very well aware of the continued improvements in database capability. The community sees this through the evidence of continued and accelerating adoption. OA was never envisioned to optimally support every algorithm known to EDA. OA’s primary goal is interoperability. There are some applications that will work well with an in-memory model and some that don’t. The point is to have a common place to store and access design data so it can be shared across applications and design teams. OA delivers a common repository to store data and access it either through C++ APIs or various scripting languages built on top of OA…a huge improvement compared to what the industry has had in the past.

DAVID.DESHARNAIS_#1
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
DAVID.DESHARNAIS_#1   12/9/2010 9:04:25 PM
NO RATINGS
Richard Goering gives "inside" scoop: http://bit.ly/gJZb5f

delta33
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
delta33   12/10/2010 7:14:57 AM
NO RATINGS
Gee, here's a nice article from Mentor Graphics' web site which starts out like this: "Now that almost all of the major custom design tools run on OpenAccess, we often get asked about how well Calibre supports OpenAccess (OA). The truth is that Calibre has supported reading polygonal data from OA since February 2007 and we have kept up with the new releases of OA as they come along" Here's the full link, you'll probably have to cut/paste it, but if a problem, just go to Mentor web site and search for OpenAccess. http://www.mentor.com/products/ic_nanometer_design/blog/post/running-calibre-from-an-openaccess-database-12ade244-ee25-43a4-aa63-c8250f6f26eb

delta33
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
delta33   12/10/2010 7:20:43 AM
NO RATINGS
Yes, but Magma's new Titan AMS platform also supports OpenAccess http://www.magma-da.com/company/company.aspx?id=2606&terms=openaccess

delta33
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
delta33   12/10/2010 7:27:46 AM
NO RATINGS
Accellera has, what,14 member companies, Si2 has over 100, who more represents the industry? Just look at the Si2 Board of Directors, and yes, Cadence and Synopsys are both on there. http://www.si2.org/?page=65

Magma Rocks!
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
Magma Rocks!   12/11/2010 12:36:33 AM
NO RATINGS
To build a best in class interoperable product, you don’t need OA in-memory database, but you absolutely need to use OA API. If you have a product that uses in-memory OA database but does not add any more value than the incumbent, then you are not going to overcome user inertia to adopt your product. Your product needs to provide value (productivity or quality of design etc.) while providing interoperability using OA API. That's how we are making our Titan customers using OA successful.

DataMuncher
User Rank
Author
re: Whither interoperability? The myth of the grand, unifying EDA database
DataMuncher   12/13/2010 3:28:57 PM
NO RATINGS
Mentor is horribly schizophrenic on OA. Calibre supports, analog tools do not (maybe some weak translation). Analog tools continue to gimp along on AMPL, a language developed back in the Falcon Framework days.

Page 1 / 2   >   >>


Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST

What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.

Brought to you by:

Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...
Like Us on Facebook
Special Video Section
Once the base layer of a design has been taped out, making ...
In this short video we show an LED light demo to ...
The LTC2380-24 is a versatile 24-bit SAR ADC that combines ...
In this short video we show an LED light demo to ...
02:46
Wireless Power enables applications where it is difficult ...
07:41
LEDs are being used in current luxury model automotive ...
With design sizes expected to increase by 5X through 2020, ...
01:48
Linear Technology’s LT8330 and LT8331, two Low Quiescent ...
The quality and reliability of Mill-Max's two-piece ...
LED lighting is an important feature in today’s and future ...
05:27
The LT8602 has two high voltage buck regulators with an ...
05:18
Silego Technology’s highly versatile Mixed-signal GreenPAK ...
The quality and reliability of Mill-Max's two-piece ...
01:34
Why the multicopter? It has every thing in it. 58 of ...
Security is important in all parts of the IoT chain, ...
Infineon explains their philosophy and why the multicopter ...
The LTC4282 Hot SwapTM controller allows a board to be ...
This video highlights the Zynq® UltraScale+™ MPSoC, and sho...
Homeowners may soon be able to store the energy generated ...
The LTC®6363 is a low power, low noise, fully differential ...