[Technology Report]
FPGA Designers See Some Of EDA's Best Work In 2007
David Maliniak
ED Online ID #17565
December 3, 2007
Copyright © 2006 Penton Media, Inc., All rights reserved. Printing of this document is for personal use only.
Reprints
With so many designers
making FPGAs
their implementation
vehicle of
choice these days,
it’s inevitable that
some of EDA’s brightest minds would
turn their attention to tools and methodologies
targeted at getting the most out of
these ever-more-capable devices.
One of the more interesting launches
was from GateRocket, a startup that has
seen FPGAs rise in size and complexity to
ASIC-like levels. With that evolution
comes a host of ASIC-like verification
issues. For FPGA designers, just as for
ASIC designers, simulation is too slow.
GateRocket’s RocketDrives are hardware
units that take advantage of the
actual target FPGAs to deliver simulation
acceleration ranging from a factor of 10
to a factor of 100. The drives, which fit
into a standard 5.25-in. PC form factor,
are scalable to as many as eight units for
system-level verification.
In a typical simulation flow, the device
under test (DUT), testbench, IP, and custom
logic are all run in the simulator
itself. But with a RocketDrive flow, any
or all of the parts of the FPGA design can
be run in the RocketDrive on the native
device (see the figure).
Sometimes, advances in FPGA tools
come not from EDA vendors but from
the FPGA makers themselves. Xilinx’s
latest Integrated Software Environment
provides runtime improvements for the
company’s Virtex-5 silicon. Its “Smart-
Compile technology” allows exact
preservation of unchanged logic while
revised logic is incrementally recompiled.
Mentor Graphics’ Precision RTL Plus
jumps on the incremental bandwagon by
offering two different incremental synthesis
flows. One is fully automatic and
requires no partitioning, while the other
is partition-based for a divide-and-conquer
approach. Mentor’s latest synthesis
suite also provides an average FMAX gain
of 10% for 19 different FPGA families
from numerous vendors.
DON’T FORGET CUSTOM
The
good news for 2007 wasn’t limited to just
FPGA designers. Custom IC teams also
sorely need flow improvements, and Synopsys
answered with its 2007.03 IC
Compiler flagship place-and-route tool.
In addition to a 35% runtime improvement
over previous versions without loss
of quality of results, the tool debuts physical
design support for the emerging 45-
nm technology node.
A final bright spot this year was vendors
actually working together for the good of
their common customers, something that
happens all too infrequently. Cadence
Design Systems and Mentor Graphics
decided to cooperate in the spirit of the
hype that accompanied SystemVerilog
onto the scene by rolling out a joint Open
Verification Methodology.
After all, SystemVerilog was promised
as a hardware description language that
would enable designers to build testbenches
and capture them in verification
IP (VIP) that could be reused time and
again. Further, these verification testbenches
and IP would be portable across
platforms and distributed environments
from various EDA vendors.
But the reality hasn’t matched the hype.
SystemVerilog users found themselves
cursing EDA vendors, whose verification
methodologies haven’t delivered the kind
of portability they promised. The Open
Verification Methodology (OVM)
addresses this with established interoperability
mechanisms for VIP, transactionlevel,
and RTL models, and full integration
with other languages used in
production flows. The OVM will also
include a robust class library and be
available in source-code format.
Yet even as EDA vendors work together
here, they diverge elsewhere. For
example, two distinct camps have
formed over standards for representation
of power-related design data. One camp,
led by Magma Design Automation, Mentor
Graphics, and Synopsys, promulgated
the United Power Format that was
formed in response to Cadence’s earlier
Common Power Format (CPF) initiative.
In both cases, the idea is roughly the
same: the formats comprise a mechanism
through which a power architecture can
be defined early in the design cycle and
then carried through to implementation
using a single view. Cadence responded
with a complete low-power design, verification,
and implementation flow that
lets an engineering team, or groups of
teams, leverage the CPF to capture lowpower
design intent at the outset of the
design process and then propagate it
throughout the flow.
|