Library Compatible Variational Delay Computation

  • Luis Guerra e Silva
  • Zhenhai Zhu
  • Joel R. Phillips
  • L. Miguel Silveira
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 249)

With technology steadily progressing into nanometer dimensions, precise control over all aspects of the fabrication process becomes an area of increasing concern. Process variations have immediate impact on circuit performance and behavior and standard design and signoff methodologies have to account for such variability. In this context, timing verification, already a challenging task due to the sheer complexity of todays designs, becomes an increasingly difficult problem. Statistical static timing analysis has been proposed as a solution to this problem, but most of the work has focused in the development of timing engines for computing delay propagation. Such tools rely on the availability of delay formulas accounting for both cell and interconnect delay that take into account unpredictable variability effects. In this paper, we concentrate on the impact of interconnect on delay and propose an extension to the standard modeling strategies that is variation-aware and compatible with such statistical engines. Our approach, based on a specific type of perturbation analysis, allows for the analytical computation of the quantities needed for statistical delay propagation. We also show how perturbation analysis can be performed when only the standard delay table lookup models are available for the standard cells. This makes the proposed approach compatible with existing timing analysis frameworks. Results from applying our proposed modeling strategy to computing delays and slews in several instances accurately match similar results obtained using electrical level simulation.


Perturbation Analysis Research Trend Cell Delay Delay Computation Timing Characterization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    C. Visweswariah, K. Ravindran, K. Kalafala, S. G. Walker, and S. Narayan. First-Order Incremental Block-Based Statistical Timing Analysis. In Proceedings of the Design Automation Conference, pages 331-336, San Diego, CA, June 2004.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Chang and S. S. Sapatnekar. Statistical Timing Analysis Considering Spatial Correlations using a Single Pert-like Traversal. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Aided-Design, pages 621-625, San Jose, CA, November 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Luis Guerra e Silva, L. Miguel Silveira, and Joel R. Phillips. Efficient Computation of the Worst-Delay Corner. In Proceedings of Design, Automation and Test in Europe, Exhibition and Conference, Nice, France, April 2007.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Wang, P. Ghanta, and S. Vrudhula. Stochastic Analysis of Interconnect Perfor-mance in the Presence of Process Variations. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Aided-Design, pages 880-886, San Jose, CA, November 2004. 176Luis Guerra e Silva, Zhenhai Zhu, Joel R. Phillips, and L. Miguel SilveiraGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Joel R. Phillips. Variational Interconnect Analysis Via PMTBR. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Aided-Design, pages 872-879, San Jose, CA, November 2004.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    X. Li, P. Li, and L. Pileggi. Parameterized interconnect order reduction with Explicit-and-Implicit multi-Parameter moment matching for Inter/Intra-Die vari-ations. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Aided-Design, pages 806-812, San Jose, CA, November 2005.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Z. Wang, R. Murgai, and J. Roychowdhury. ADAMIN: Automated, accurate ma-comodelling of digital aggressors for power and ground supply noise prediction. IEEE Transaction on CAD, 24:56-64, January 2005.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joel R. Phillips. Model Computation for Statistical Static Timing Analysis, May 2006. Cadence Internal Report.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Telichevesky, J. White, and K. Kundert. Efficient AC and Noise Analysis of Two-Tone RF Circuits. In Proceedings of the Design Automation Conference, June 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sani R. Nassif and Zhuo Li. A More Effective CEF F . In Proceedinge of the Sixth International Symposium on Quality of Electronic Design, pages 654-661, San Jose, CA, March 2005.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Qian, S. Pullela, and L. Pillage. Modeling the Effective Capacitance for the RC Interconnect of CMOS Gates. IEEE Trans. on VLSI, 13:1526-1535, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Florentin Dartu, Noel Menezes, and Lawrence T. Pileggi. Performance Compu-tation for Precharacterized CMOS Gates with RC Loads. IEEE Trans. on CAD, 15 (5):544-553, May 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Igor Keller, Nishath Verghese, and Kenneth Tseng. A Robust Cell-Level Crosstalk Delay Change Analysis. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Aided-Design, San Jose, CA, November 2004.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.F. Croix and D.F Wong. Blade and Razor: Cell and Interconnect Delay Analysis using Current-Based Models. In Proceedings of the Design Automation Conference, pages 386 - 389, Anaheim, CA, June 2003.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S.W. Director and R. A. Rohrer. The Generalized Adjoint Network and Network Sensitivities. IEEE Trans. on Circuit Theory, CT-16(3):318-323, August 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processin 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luis Guerra e Silva
    • 1
  • Zhenhai Zhu
    • 2
  • Joel R. Phillips
    • 2
  • L. Miguel Silveira
    • 1
  1. 1.Cadence Laboratories / INESC-ID ISTTech. U. LisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Cadence Berkeley LaboratoriesCadence Design SystemsSan JoseUSA

Personalised recommendations