i had encountered error message like this before. 

but in liberate, i did not find the entry to input section info. 

Hi ,

     I have designed analog IP in cadence ADE and simulated in spectre. All corner results looks good. when i run monte carlo 1000 runs have high current in 125C two runs. Simulated with same setup in different user, all clean.Need to know what type sampling method used and why its not clean with my setup.

Thanks,

Anbarasu

Hello,

I am trying to use calcVal for creating a spec condition from a simulated parameter and although this works perfectly fine in corner simulations, I am having some difficulties in Monte-Carlo (and I will explain).

(I have also read "Using calcVal() and its arguments with ADE Assembler" in Resources > Rapid Adoption Kits but couldn't find any relevant information that would help me address the "issue").

In the above example I am performing a MC simulation which has 2 corners of 10 runs each. I would like to get the minimum value of variable "OC_limit_thres" out of those 10 runs and pass it as my upper limit to a range argument for variable "OC_flag_thres", so the CPK can be calculated.

So the range statement should in reality be like this:

range 32m 44.34m (for corner 0)

range 32m 43.14m (for corner 1)

If I open the Detail - Transpose view in the Results tab, the calcVal("OC_limit_thres" "Currlim_TurnOn_C11") is calculated perfectly fine for each run but here I need one single value out of those 10 runs - in this case the minimum - in order for calcVal to evalute on multiple runs of 1 corner.

How can this be done please?

Thank you in advance for your time.

I have a question regarding simulating IBIS model using Spectre.  IBIS model generation always has the die capacitance included and in the generated IBIS file you will have this value as  “C_comp” value.  Does the Spectre accounts for this capacitance from the IBIS file while computing the time domain voltage waveform during simulation ?  If I add additional capacitance outside in the testbench, to model the die capacitance, then it will be double counting.

Does anyone know if Spectre is already accounting this C_comp during the time domain voltage wave computation from IBIS file, during simulation ?

Hello,

I am trying to import (in spectre) an spice model of a ceramic capacitor manufactured by Samsung EM. The link that includes the model is here :-

http://weblib.samsungsem.com/mlcc/mlcc-ec.do?partNumber=CL05A156MR6NWR

They proved static spice model and interactive spice model.

I had no problem while including the static model.

However, the interactive model which models voltage and temperature coefficients seems to not be an ordinary spice model. They provide HSPICE, LTSPICE, and PSPICE model files and I failed to include any of them.

Any suggestions ?

Hello,

I am using ultrasim Version 18.1.0.314.isr5  64bit 03/26/2019 06:33 (csvcm20c-2).

When I run my netlist, ultrasim is blocked in the first DC stage and takes forever. Then it will fail or never progress. I am using a 22nm BSIMBULK model. I tried to tune different accuracy and convergence aids options but noting works.

 When I run the same netlist with spectre it works fine with no problem.

Also, If I use another model (not BULKSIM), ultrasim will work and converge with no problem.

My first feeling is that ultrasim has a problem with using BSIMBULK model.

Could you please advice,

Thank you,

Kotb

Hello,

I am using Virtuoso 6.1.7.

I am performing the parasitic extraction of a MOM cap array of 32 caps. I use Quantus QRC and I enable field solver. I select “QRCFS” for field solver type and “High” for field solver accuracy. The unit MOM cap is horizontally and vertically symmetric. The array looks like the sketch below and there are no other structures except the unit caps:

Rationally speaking, the capacitance values of the unit caps should be symmetric with respect to a vertical symmetry axis that is between cap16 and cap17 (shown with dashed red line). For example,

the capacitance of cap1 should be equal to the capacitance of cap32

the capacitance of cap2 should be equal to the capacitance of cap31

etc. as there are no other structures around the caps that might create some asymmetry.

Nevertheless, what I observe is the following after the parasitic extraction:

As it can be seen, the result is not symmetric contrary to what is expected. I should also add that I do not observe this when I perform parasitic extraction with no filed solver.

Why do I get this result? Is it an artifact resulting from the field solver tool (my conclusion was yes but still it must be verified)? If not, how can something like this happen?

Many thanks in advance.

Best regards,

Can

Before I ask this, I am aware that I can output an s-parameter file from an SP analysis.

I'm wondering if there is a simple way of creating an s-parameter model of a component.

As an example, if I have an S-parameter model that has 200 ports and 150 of those ports are to be connected to passive components and the remaining 50 ports are to be connected to active components, I can simplify the model by connecting the 150 passive components, running an SP analysis, and generating a 50 port S-parameter file.

The problem is that this is cumbersome. You've got to wire up 50 PORT components and then after generating the s50p file, create a new cellview with an nport component and connect the 50 ports with 50 new pins.

Wiring up all of those port components takes quite a lot of time to do, especially as the "choosing analyses" form adds arrays in reverse (e.g. if you click on an array of PORT components called X<0:2> it will add X<2>, X<1>, X<0> instead of in ascending order) so you have to add all of them to the analyses form manually.

Is any way of taking a schematic and running some magic "generate S-Parameter cellview from schematic cellview"  function that automates the whole process?

The Cadence® Genus  Synthesis Solution, Innovus  Implementation System, and Tempus  Timing Signoff Solution have a lot of shared functionality, but in the past, the separate legacy user interfaces (UIs) created a lot of differences.

A new common user interface that the Genus solution shares with the Innovus and Tempus solutions streamlines flow development and simplifies usability across the complete Cadence digital flow. The Stylus Common UI provides a next-generation synthesis-to-signoff flow with unified database access, MMMC timing configuration and reporting, and low-power design initialization.

This webinar answers the following questions:

• What is the Stylus Common UI and why did Cadence develop it?
• How does someone invoke and use the Stylus Common UI?
• What are some of the important and useful features of the Stylus Common UI?
• What are key ways the Stylus Common UI is different from the Legacy UI?

If you want to learn more about Stylus UI in the context of Genus Synthesis Solution, refer to 45-minute recorded webinar on https://support.cadence.com (Cadence login required).

Video Title: Webinar: Genus Synthesis Solution—Introduction to the Stylus Common UI (Video)

Direct Link: https://support.cadence.com/apex/ArticleAttachmentPortal?id=a1O0V000009MoGIUA0&pageName=ArticleContent

Related Resources

If interested in the full course, including lab content, please contact your Cadence representative or email a request to training_enroll@cadence.com. You can also enroll in the course on http://learning.cadence.com.​

Enhance the Genus Synthesis experience with videos: Genus Synthesis Solution: Video Library

For any questions, general feedback, or future blog topic suggestions, please leave a comment. 

Key Findings:  Nearly 100% of SoCs are mixed-signal to some extent.  Every one of these could benefit from the use of a metrics-driven unified verification methodology for mixed-signal (MD-UVM-MS), but the modeling step is the biggest hurdle to overcome.  Without the magical models, the process breaks down for lack of performance, or holes in the chip verification.

In the last installment of The Low Road, we were at the mixed-signal verification party. While no one talked about it, we all saw it: The party was raging and everyone was having a great time, but they were all dancing around that big elephant right in the middle of the room. For mixed-signal verification, that elephant is named Modeling.

To get to a fully verified SoC, the analog portions of the design have to run orders of magnitude faster than the speediest SPICE engine available. That means an abstraction of the behavior must be created. It puts a lot of people off when you tell them they have to do something extra to get done with something sooner. Guess what, it couldn’t be more true. If you want to keep dancing around like the elephant isn’t there, then enjoy your day. If you want to see about clearing the pachyderm from the dance floor, you’ll want to read on a little more….

Figure 1: The elephant in the room: who’s going to create the model?

 Whose job is it?

Modeling analog/mixed-signal behavior for use in SoC verification seems like the ultimate hot potato.  The analog team that creates the IP blocks says it doesn't have the expertise in digital verification to create a high-performance model. The digital designers say they don’t understand anything but ones and zeroes. The verification team, usually digitally-centric by background, are stuck in the middle (and have historically said “I just use the collateral from the design teams to do my job; I don’t create it”).

If there is an SoC verification team, then ensuring that the entire chip is verified ultimately rests upon their shoulders, whether or not they get all of the models they need from the various design teams for the project. That means that if a chip does not work because of a modeling error, it ought to point back to the verification team. If not, is it just a “systemic error” not accounted for in the methodology? That seems like a bad answer.

That all makes the most valuable guy in the room the engineer, whose knowledge spans the three worlds of analog, digital, and verification. There are a growing number of “mixed-signal verification engineers” found on SoC verification teams. Having a specialist appears to be the best approach to getting the job done, and done right.

So, my vote is for the verification team to step up and incorporate the expertise required to do a complete job of SoC verification, analog included. (I know my popularity probably did not soar with the attendees of DVCON with that statement, but the job has to get done).

It’s a game of trade-offs

The difference in computations required for continuous time versus discrete time behavior is orders of magnitude (as seen in Figure 2 below). The essential detail versus runtime tradeoff is a key enabler of verification techniques like software-driven testbenches. Abstraction is a lossy process, so care must be taken to fully understand the loss and test those elements in the appropriate domain (continuous time, frequency, etc.).

Figure 2: Modeling is required for performance

AFE for instance

The traditional separation of baseband and analog front-end (AFE) chips has shifted for the past several years. Advances in process technology, analog-to-digital converters, and the desire for cost reduction have driven both a re-architecting and re-partitioning of the long-standing baseband/AFE solution. By moving more digital processing to the AFE, lower cost architectures can be created, as well as reducing those 130 or so PCB traces between the chips.

There is lots of good scholarly work from a few years back on this subject, such as Digital Compensation of Dynamic Acquisition Errors at the Front-End of ADCS and Digital Compensation for Analog Front-Ends: A New Approach to Wireless Transceiver Design.

Figure 3: AFE evolution from first reference (Parastoo)

The digital calibration and compensation can be achieved by the introduction of a programmable solution. This is in fact the most popular approach amongst the mobile crowd today. By using a microcontroller, the software algorithms become adaptable to process-related issues and modifications to protocol standards.

However, for the SoC verification team, their job just got a whole lot harder. To determine if the interplay of the digital control and the analog function is working correctly, the software algorithms must be simulated on the combination of the two. That is, here is a classic case of inseparable mixed-signal verification.

So, what needs to be in the model is the big question. And the answer is, a lot. For this example, the main sources of dynamic error at the front-end of ADCs are critical for the non-linear digital filtering that is highly frequency dependent. The correction scheme must be verified to show that the nonlinearities are cancelled across the entire bandwidth of the ADC. 

This all means lots of simulation. It means that the right level of detail must be retained to ensure the integrity of the verification process. This means that domain experience must be added to the list of expertise of that mixed-signal verification engineer.

Back to the pachyderm

There is a lot more to say on this subject, and lots will be said in future posts. The important starting point is the recognition that the potential flaw in the system needs to be examined. It needs to be examined by a specialist.  Maybe a second opinion from the application domain is needed too.

So, put that cute little elephant on your desk as a reminder that the beast can be tamed.

Steve Carlson

Related stories

- It’s Late, But the Party is Just Getting Started

Verification is the top challenge in mixed-signal design. Bringing analog and digital domains together into unified verification planning, simulating, and debugging is a challenging task for rapidly increasing size and complexity of mixed-signal designs. To more completely verify functionality and performance of a mixed-signal SoC and its AMS IP blocks used to build it, verification teams use simulations at transistor, analog behavioral and real-number model (RNM) and RTL levels, and combination of these.

In recent years, RNM and simulation is being adopted for functional verification by many, due to advantages it offers including simpler modeling requirements and much faster simulation speed (compared to a traditional analog behavioral models like Verilog-A or VHDL-AMS). Verilog-AMS with its wreal continue to be popular choice. Standardization of real number extensions in SystemVerilog (SV) made SV-RNM an even more attractive choice for MS SoC verification.

Verilog-AMS/wreal is scalar real type. SV-RNM offers a powerful ability to define complex data types, providing a user-defined structure (record) to describe the net value. In a typical design, most analog nodes can be modeled using a single value for passing a voltage (or current) from one module to another. The ability to pass multiple values over a net can be very powerful when, for example, the impedance load impact on an analog signal needs to be modeled. Here is an example of a user-defined net (UDN) structure that holds voltage, current, and resistance values:

When there are multiple drives on a single net, the simulator will need a resolution function to determine the final net value. When the net is just defined as a single real value, common resolution functions such as min, max, average, and sum are built into the simulator.  But definition of more complex structures for the net also requires the user to provide appropriate resolution functions for them. Here is an example of a net with three drivers modeled using the above defined structural elements (a voltage source with series resistance, a resistive load, and a current source):

To properly solve for the resulting output voltage, the resolution function for this net needs to perform Norton conversion of the elements, sum their currents and conductances, and then calculate the resolved output voltage as the sum of currents divided by sum of conductances.

With some basic understanding of circuit theory, engineers can use SV-RNM UDN capability to model electrical behavior of many different circuits. While it is primarily defined to describe source/load impedance interactions, its use can be extended to include systems including capacitors, switching circuits, RC interconnect, charge pumps, power regulators, and others. Although this approach extends the scope of functional verification, it is not a replacement for transistor-level simulation when accuracy, performance verification, or silicon correlation are required:  It simply provides an efficient solution for discretely modeling small analog networks (one to several nodes).  Mixed-signal simulation with an analog solver is still the best solution when large nonlinear networks must be evaluated.

Cadence provides a tutorial on EEnet usage as well as the package (EEnet.pkg) with UDN definitions and resolution functions and modeling examples. To learn more, please login to your Cadence account to access the tutorial.

When the Arduino Mega2560 is added to the first serial port, the dynamic memory is 2000 bytes, and when the second serial serial is added, the dynamic memory is 4000 bytes. Now I need to add the third Serial serial port. The dynamic memory is 6000 bytes. Due to the many variables in the program itself, the dynamic memory is not enough. Please help me how to save the dynamic memory?

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Moradabad on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

ગુજરાત સ્થાપના દિવસ અંગે PM Modi એ Tweet કરીને ગુજરાતની જનતાને આપી શુભેચ્છાઓ

Modi સરકારે ત્રીજી વખત Lockdown માં કર્યો વધારો, જાણો કેટલા દિવસ સુધી રહેશે લોકડાઉન ?

ભારતમાં Coronavirus ની 30 રસી પર કામ શરૂ, PM Modi એ કરી સમીક્ષા

Buddha Purnima પર PM Modiએ કહ્યું, ભારત પોતાની વૈશ્વિક જવાબદારીનું કરી રહ્યું છે પાલન

વિશાખાપટ્ટનમ: ગેસ લિકેજ મામલે PM Modiનું ટ્વીટ, પરિસ્થિતિ પર રખાઈ રહી છે નજર

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Chamoli on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Sirmour on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

Super Pink moon: 8 એપ્રિલે ચૈત્રી પૂર્ણિમાનો શુભ સંયોગ, આ સમયે જુઓ સુપરમૂન

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Morena on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Morigaon on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Almora on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Mokokchung on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Damoh on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Mon on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

visit News18 Urdu for latest news, breaking news, news headlines and updates from Moga on politics, sports, entertainment, cricket, crime and more.

This Metasploit module exploits a type confusion vulnerability found in the ActiveX component of Adobe Flash Player. This vulnerability was found exploited in the wild in November 2013. This Metasploit module has been tested successfully on IE 6 to IE 10 with Flash 11.7, 11.8 and 11.9 prior to 11.9.900.170 over Windows XP SP3 and Windows 7 SP1.

This Metasploit module exploits a vulnerability found in the ActiveX component of Adobe Flash Player before 12.0.0.43. By supplying a specially crafted swf file it is possible to trigger an integer underflow in several avm2 instructions, which can be turned into remote code execution under the context of the user, as exploited in the wild in February 2014. This Metasploit module has been tested successfully with Adobe Flash Player 11.7.700.202 on Windows XP SP3, Windows 7 SP1 and Adobe Flash Player 11.3.372.94 on Windows 8 even when it includes rop chains for several Flash 11 versions, as exploited in the wild.

UCanCode has active-x vulnerabilities which allow for remote code execution and denial of service attacks.

Adobe Flash Active-X plugin version 28.0.0.137 remote code execution proof of concept exploit.

iWatch is a real-time filesystem monitoring program. It is a tool for detecting any changes on your filesystem and reporting it to the system administrator immediately. It uses a simple configuration file in XML format and is based on inotify, a file change notification system in the Linux kernel.