You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
ASAP7 tech LEF vs. the design rule manual: what should the router be held to?
#4667
Checking ORFS ASAP7 designs against the DRM (asap7_drm_201207a.pdf) with gdscheck found that asap7_tech_1x_201209.lef diverges from the manual in about 20 rules. The full per-rule list, with the LEF statement for each, is here: gdscheck: Against the tech LEF. They fall into four kinds:
The LEF's own vias break the DRM:VIA89 has no enclosure, and VIA78's cut isn't flush with M8 (asap7: fix M8 enclosure in VIA78 to be minwidth #142 widened its M8 pad to the minimum width but not the cut). A fix is ready; it changes routing for every design using M8/M9.
Rules the LEF states more weakly: M1 corner spacing, V6 cut spacing, the M8/M9 spacing table.
Rules the LEF can't or doesn't state: M1 tip spacing by edge length, V0/V1 M1 enclosure, M8/M9 width by length, grid and track rules for non-router shapes.
Maybe an update to the DRM itself might be better and go the other way and make the asap7_tech_1x_201209.lef the source of truth?
Flow-side fixes in progress: an on-grid ASAP7 PDN (asap7-pdn-ongrid; ORFS gcd/aes go to zero DRM violations on router-held rules, with lower IR drop), fin-grid macro snapping, and The-OpenROAD-Project/OpenROAD#11700 for syn's DEF units.
Questions:
Should the tech LEF follow the DRM where LEF can express it (kinds 2–3), accepting QoR changes on existing designs?
For kind 4, is a documented list in platforms/asap7/README.md the right home?
Should ORFS's ASAP7 DRC (asap7.lydrc) check the grid and track rules? It currently has them switched off (OFFGRID = false).
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Checking ORFS ASAP7 designs against the DRM (
asap7_drm_201207a.pdf) with gdscheck found thatasap7_tech_1x_201209.lefdiverges from the manual in about 20 rules. The full per-rule list, with the LEF statement for each, is here: gdscheck: Against the tech LEF. They fall into four kinds:DATABASE MICRONS 4000instead, which holds them exactly.VIA89has no enclosure, andVIA78's cut isn't flush with M8 (asap7: fix M8 enclosure in VIA78 to be minwidth #142 widened its M8 pad to the minimum width but not the cut). A fix is ready; it changes routing for every design using M8/M9.Maybe an update to the DRM itself might be better and go the other way and make the
asap7_tech_1x_201209.lefthe source of truth?Related: #4541 (switching ASAP7 to the #4532 LEF; these divergences are in both files), The-OpenROAD-Project/asap7#22 (V3/V5
LEF58_ENCLOSUREin the 4x LEF) and The-OpenROAD-Project/asap7#3 (an M6SPACINGthat contradicts its own table).Flow-side fixes in progress: an on-grid ASAP7 PDN (
asap7-pdn-ongrid; ORFSgcd/aesgo to zero DRM violations on router-held rules, with lower IR drop), fin-grid macro snapping, and The-OpenROAD-Project/OpenROAD#11700 forsyn's DEF units.Questions:
platforms/asap7/README.mdthe right home?asap7.lydrc) check the grid and track rules? It currently has them switched off (OFFGRID = false).All reactions