Transcript Boosters for Driving Long On

Boosters for Driving Long
On-chip Interconnects: Design Issues,
Interconnect Synthesis and Comparison with
Repeaters
Ankireddy Nalamalpu
Intel Corporation/Hillsboro
Wayne Burleson
UMASS/Amherst
Partially Funded by SRC under research ID 766
Motivation
• Interconnect delay will dominate DSM
• Limited performance by using traditional techniques
(Repeaters) for driving on-chip interconnects
• Repeaters are area and power hungry
• This study aims to provide
• New high-performance circuit technique (Booster) for
driving interconnects
• Over-all Booster design methodology to integrate into
automatic interconnect synthesis tools
• Study/comparison Boosters with Repeaters
Repeater Design
• Classical delay optimal repeater solution when delay of
repeaters equals interconnect delay [Bakoglu85]
• Repeater design solutions model short-channel effects in
DSM using Alpha Power MOSFET model [Friedman98b,
Nalamalpu00b]
Repeater Design Limitations
60
6x106
50
5x106
40
4x106
30
3x106
20
2x106
10
1x106
0 0.25
•
•
•
•
•
0.2
0.15
0.1
[Plot from
Sylvester99]
0.05
Technology Generation(m)
Limited performance with Repeaters in DSM due to nonnegligible interconnect resistance
Increasing Repeater Area and Power with technology scaling
[Sylvester98, Sylvester99]
700,000 repeaters in 70nm CMOS [Cong99]
Increased design problems with repeaters driving bi-directional
and multi-source buses
Inverting Polarity
Review of Previous Work
Driver
Driver
Interconnect
Receiver
Interconnect
2,4…Inverters
• Regenerative Feed-back Repeaters for driving
programmable interconnections[Dobbelaere95]
•
•
•
•
Extremely sensitive to Noise
Meta-stability
Two-sided Timing Constraints
Limit in performance gain
Receiver
Review of Previous Work
• Differential, Small-swing and other design
techniques[Lima95,Friedman98a]
• Requires more circuit design sophistication
• Cumbersome for automatic interconnect synthesis tools
• Require multiple Power Supply’s in some cases
We need simple and yet high-performance
circuit technique that can be integrated into
automatic interconnect synthesis tools
Proposed Design
• Our proposed circuit (Booster) differs from the
existing designs in one or more of the following
•
•
•
•
High Performance
Simpler and requires fewer transistors
Noise immunity
Eliminates Meta-stability
• We formulate analytical design rules for Boosters
to be part of automatic interconnect synthesis tool
Booster Circuit
fout
Driver
Driver
Full Keeper
Input
rin Driver
bp
Interconnect
P=2.0
bout
tn
Interconnect
N=1.0
Receiver
Receiver
Skewed Inverters
P=2.0
P=2.0
N=1.0
N=1.0
Feed-back
Booster Simulations
•
Input
Firing
Feed-back
Path
Inverter
Outputs
RLC 5 T-Interconnect
model in 0.16m CMOS
• Feedback path
• Improves the speed of
driver
• Prevents turning-off
booster prematurely
thereby eliminating
two-sided timing
constraints
• Makes circuit glitch
immune
Booster Design
• Skewed inverters respond to opposite ends of
voltage transition
• Driving both the inverters to feed-back path
improves noise immunity
• Full keeper helps noise cause
• Booster firing time depends on switching
thresholds of inverters
• Boosters attach to the wire rather than interrupting
it so can be used for bi-directional signals
• Boosters don’t impact the polarity of the signal
Booster Design Methodology
• Analytically determine number of boosters
and their placements for driving given
interconnect load
• Consider only delay optimality
• Minimize power/area impact without losing
significant speed-up
Booster Placement
350
300
Delay without Booster(ps)
250
200
150
BR1
BR2
BR3
Delay with Booster(ps)
100
50
BR1, BR2, BR3 = Boosters
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Booster Transient Variation(t/T)
• Boosters no good for driving very short wires due to fast
transients in small RC loads (how short?)
• In-order to place a booster
• Firing time(T) < Time Constant(t)
• Booster Transient variation (t/T) > 2.5, to minimize total
number of boosters
3.0
Booster Analytical Model
Node(a)
Node(b)
bp
tn
Length = L1
Length = L2
Length = L3
2
 
t (V a  svdd )  t V bp Vdd
t
(
 23 v )

V
a
dd
5
2 
• Using simple inverter model(which will suffice)

1
2
  L1
(
)

ln(
1

s
)
C

R


Cr 2 
r 0  5
 L


2
L1 

L

2kw
RC  C r  
 k n vdd
Booster Analytical Model
• Using more accurate alpha-power law based
inverter analytical model [Nalamalpu00b]
• Alpha power MOSFET law [Sakurai90] models
short-channel effects
• Repeater model is within 5% error of SPICE
 V dd 
 L1  C (b vdd  vd 0 )


5wk
L
L
1
1


 




ln

R

C

 L
3
 Rd 0 L  C r L  2
 


v
k p vdd
I d0
 d 0 
Rule for Number of Boosters
Interconnect Delay
Short-circuit Power
Number of Boosters
• When boosters(BR1, BR2, BR3) are initially off
• L1,L2 and L3 will be different for identical segment delays due to
characteristics of signal propagation along RC line
• Unlike Repeaters, placing non-optimal number of boosters
doesn’t impact performance as much as power
Rule for Number of Boosters
L1
BR1
L2
L3
BR2
L4
BR3
BR4
BR1, BR2, BR3, BR4 = Boosters
• To Minimize number of boosters
• Any down stream booster (e.g.BR2) should be fired
only after improved upstream signal transient (e.g. A,
BR1 is active) propagates downstream (e.g.B)
• L1<L2<L3<L4 for identical segment delays
Booster Placement Sensitivity
Block A
Block C
Block B
No Glue Logic
Realistic floor-plans will have several placement constraints
•
•
•
•
Inter block routing
Repeater staggering to reduce inductive and capacitive coupling
To ensure the design is manageable (e.g. verifiable, reusable)
To maintain datapath’s regularity
Booster Placement Sensitivity
• Repeaters are shown to be sensitive to placement
variation[Nalamalpu00a]
• Worst case placement scenario’s results in performance
degradation by as much as 30%
• Boosters relatively insensitive to placement variation due
to its dependence on transient
SPICE Simulations
Repeaters
Boosters
• We used delay optimal repeater design solution obtained
by using alpha-power MOSFET model[Nalamalpu00b]
• Booster design rules for finding number of boosters and
their placements are used to minimize design cost without
losing significant speed (<5%)
• CMOS 0.16 m process is used for SPICE simulations
• Interconnect load is represented using RLC 5 T-model
(k)
SPICE Simulations
CL
(pF)
Rt
nbooster nrepeaterWbooster WrepeaterDbooster Drepeater Speed( m )
(k)
(m) (m) (ps) (ps) up (%)
1.0
1.0
2
5
300
360
349
434
19.2
1.25 1.25 2
6
300
432
451
567
20.6
4.0
1.0
4
11
750
1518 688
829
17.0
2.0
5.0
5
17
750
816
1287 27.6
20
1.0
9
22
1350 6732 1380 1792 23.1
933
Boosters Vs Repeaters
• Boosters shown to out-perform Repeaters by 20%
for all kinds of interconnect loads (both capacitive
and resistive dominated)
• Boosters interconnect driving distance is 3x that of
Repeaters resulting in fewer Boosters
• Significant reduction in Area over Repeaters
(more than 100% depending on interconnect load)
• Boosters are insensitive to placement variation
• Boosters don’t impact the polarity of the signal
Booster Applications
• Uni/bi-directional
interconnects
• Multi-source/sink
buses
• Programmable
Interconnections in
FPGA’s
Booster
Off Switches
On Switches
Booster
Booster
Booster
Booster Applications
Long AND domino
gates (e.g decoders)
• Precharge from top of
the stack and discharge
is from bottom of the
stack
• Bi-directional signaling
can be improved using
boosters
Booster Limitations
• Boosters don’t break lines however for buffering,
modularity and signal integrity reasons it is
desirable to break long lines
• Boosters are not well understood by CAD tools
and designers
Conclusions
• We presented analytical design solutions, both
hard optimization and softer realistic design
problems
• We propose to combine Boosters with Repeaters
in some cases to handle both modularity and
signal integrity issues
• Boosters find application in long dynamic ANDs,
and multi-source interconnects in addition to
conventional point-to-point long lines
Future Work
• Integration into interconnect synthesis tool
with Repeaters
• Impact on bi-directional multi-source lines
which could directly impact VLIW, FPGA,
Routers, multi-processor, memory and other
highly connected architectures
Acknowledgements
Sriram Srinivasan for insightful comments
Prof. Arnold Rosenberg for the initial
theoretical motivations in exploring booster
circuits
SRC for partially supporting under Research
ID 766
UMASS has filed for several patents related
to Booster technology
References
[Dobbelaere95] Dobbelaere et al , Regenerative Feed-back
Repeaters for Programmable Interconnections, JSSC, 1995
[Lima95] T. Lima et al, Capacitance Coupling Immune
Accelerator for Resistive Interconnects, IEEE Trans. on
Electron Devices, 1995
[Friedman98a] Secareanu et al, Transparent Repeaters,
GLSVLSI,1998
[Nalamalpu00a] A. Nalamalpu et al, Quantifying and
Mitigating Placement Constraints, 2000
[Sakurai90] Sakurai et al , Alpha-Power MOSFET Model,
JSSC,1990
[Nalamalpu00b] A. Nalamalpu et al , Repeater Ramp based
Analytical Model, ISCAS,2000
References
[Sylvester98] D.Sylvester et al, Getting to the bottom of deep
sub-micron, ICCAD, 1998
[Sylvester99] D.Sylvester et al, Getting to the bottom of deep
sub-micron II, ISPD, 1999
[Friedman98b] V.Adler et al, Repeater Design to Reduce
Delay and Power, IEEE Trans. Circuits and System II,
1998
[Bakoglu85] Bakoglu et al, Optimal Interconnection Circuits
for VLSI, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, 1985