Measuring Quality in Semiconductor IP
By Piyush Sancheti, Atrenta Inc
edadesignline.com (September 29, 2008)
Semiconductor IP reuse can yield a 2x improvement in design productivity for semiconductor companies. However, with these startling productivity gains come integration pain. Why? Semiconductor IP is essentially a black box for the SoC team that comes from various external sources, with varying and often unknown levels of quality and reusability. SoC designers must find a quality metric for semiconductor IP. If not, they may abandon its use.
Most semiconductor IP today is delivered as soft IP - register transfer level (RTL) or configurable generators that produce RTL. IP suppliers do ensure correct functional behavior. Often overlooked in this process is the communication of design intent and implementation feasibility, a task left for the IP consumer to deal with. A poorly designed IP can result in failures at the SoC level with timing, routing congestion, power, clock synchronization, test coverage, etc. Typically these issues will not be uncovered until after a significant engineering effort has been spent on integration of the IP into the SoC and subsequent implementation. The net result is expensive design iterations, project delays and potential silicon failure.
edadesignline.com (September 29, 2008)
Semiconductor IP reuse can yield a 2x improvement in design productivity for semiconductor companies. However, with these startling productivity gains come integration pain. Why? Semiconductor IP is essentially a black box for the SoC team that comes from various external sources, with varying and often unknown levels of quality and reusability. SoC designers must find a quality metric for semiconductor IP. If not, they may abandon its use.
Most semiconductor IP today is delivered as soft IP - register transfer level (RTL) or configurable generators that produce RTL. IP suppliers do ensure correct functional behavior. Often overlooked in this process is the communication of design intent and implementation feasibility, a task left for the IP consumer to deal with. A poorly designed IP can result in failures at the SoC level with timing, routing congestion, power, clock synchronization, test coverage, etc. Typically these issues will not be uncovered until after a significant engineering effort has been spent on integration of the IP into the SoC and subsequent implementation. The net result is expensive design iterations, project delays and potential silicon failure.
To read the full article, click here
Related Semiconductor IP
- HBM4 PHY IP
- Ultra-Low-Power LPDDR3/LPDDR2/DDR3L Combo Subsystem
- MIPI D-PHY and FPD-Link (LVDS) Combinational Transmitter for TSMC 22nm ULP
- HBM4 Controller IP
- IPSEC AES-256-GCM (Standalone IPsec)
Related Articles
- Structural netlist efficiently verifies analog IP
- Analog IP verification guidelines
- Leverage always-on voice trigger IP to reach ultra-low power consumption in voice-controlled devices
- New Power Management IP Solution Can Dramatically Increase SoC Energy Efficiency
Latest Articles
- ElfCore: A 28nm Neural Processor Enabling Dynamic Structured Sparse Training and Online Self-Supervised Learning with Activity-Dependent Weight Update
- A 14ns-Latency 9Gb/s 0.44mm² 62pJ/b Short-Blocklength LDPC Decoder ASIC in 22FDX
- Pipeline Stage Resolved Timing Characterization of FPGA and ASIC Implementations of a RISC V Processor
- Lyra: A Hardware-Accelerated RISC-V Verification Framework with Generative Model-Based Processor Fuzzing
- Leveraging FPGAs for Homomorphic Matrix-Vector Multiplication in Oblivious Message Retrieval