Cadence® system design and verification solutions, integrated under our Verification Suite, provide the simulation, acceleration, emulation, and management capabilities.
Verification Suite Related Products A-Z
Cadence® digital design and signoff solutions provide a fast path to design closure and better predictability, helping you meet your power, performance, and area (PPA) targets.
Full-Flow Digital Solution Related Products A-Z
Cadence® custom, analog, and RF design solutions can help you save time by automating many routine tasks, from block-level and mixed-signal simulation to routing and library characterization.
Overview Related Products A-Z
Driving efficiency and accuracy in advanced packaging, system planning, and multi-fabric interoperability, Cadence® package implementation products deliver the automation and accuracy.
Cadence® PCB design solutions enable shorter, more predictable design cycles with greater integration of component design and system-level simulation for a constraint-driven flow.
An open IP platform for you to customize your app-driven SoC design.
Comprehensive solutions and methodologies.
Helping you meet your broader business goals.
A global customer support infrastructure with around-the-clock help.
More Support Log In
24/7 Support - Cadence Online Support
Locate the latest software updates, service request, technical documentation, solutions and more in your personalized environment.
Cadence offers various software services for download. This page describes our offerings, including the Allegro FREE Physical Viewer.
The Cadence Academic Network helps build strong relationships between academia and industry, and promotes the proliferation of leading-edge technologies and methodologies at universities renowned for their engineering and design excellence.
Participate in CDNLive
A huge knowledge exchange platform for academia to network with industry. We are looking for academic speakers to talk about their research to the industry attendees at the Academic Track at CDNLive EMEA and Silicon Valley.
Come & Meet Us @ Events
A huge knowledge exchange platform for academia. We are looking for academic speakers to talk about their research to industry attendees.
Americas University Software Program
Join the 250+ qualified Americas member universities who have already incorporated Cadence EDA software into their classrooms and academic research projects.
EMEA University Software Program
In EMEA, Cadence works with EUROPRACTICE to ensure cost-effective availability of our extensive electronic design automation (EDA) tools for non-commercial activities.
Apply Now For Jobs
If you are a recent college graduate or a student looking for internship. Visit our exclusive job search page for interns and recent college graduate jobs.
Cadence is a Great Place to do great work
Learn more about our internship program and visit our careers page to do meaningful work and make a great impact.
Get the most out of your investment in Cadence technologies through a wide range of training offerings.
Overview All Courses Asia Pacific EMEANorth America
Instructor-led training [ILT] are live classes that are offered in our state-of-the-art classrooms at our worldwide training centers, at your site, or as a Virtual classroom.
Online Training is delivered over the web to let you proceed at your own pace, anytime and anywhere.
Exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices.
The community is open to everyone, and to provide the most value, we require participants to follow our Community Guidelines that facilitate a quality exchange of ideas and information.
It's not all about the technology. Here we exchange ideas on the Cadence Academic Network and other subjects of general interest.
Cadence is a leading provider of system design tools, software, IP, and services.
Get email delivery of the Cadence blog featured here
For years as a designer, levels of logic analysis was a staple in the ASIC flows I worked on. Especially the last company (before I joined Cadence), the ASIC vendor we worked with forced us to abide by their Levels of Logic analysis metric before moving onto the next milestone. It seemed to work, to help identify a good number of paths that would give us bigger headaches in the backend if we didn't address them early on.
Our ASIC Vendor said: " No Levels of Logic 'PASS', no check mark." As simple as that.
How about today?
One question that's been bouncing around in my mind lately is: "Levels of Logic", is that a thing of the past? Does it matter any more? Does anyone care and measure it today?
I honestly thought it was dead, until a few customers contacted me recently.
Customer 1: A few months ago, a designer from a big company said that they were looking into it as a metric to help drive RTL designers. This request was coming from a group that believed that they needed to be more proactive in giving feedback to the RTL designers., and this was one solution.
Customer 2: Today, another customer from another large company was saying something similar. "I don't want to only see my timing challenged paths, they aren't typically the only ones I need to worry about, I want to see the longest paths too. Why? Because those are the ones that historically have given me timing closure issues."
So, if you have an opinion, please post a short one to share. :)
(of course this doesn't describe what method would be used to generate the Levels of Logic report, but that's another topic for later ...)
Hi cmoney and Valeriy, sorry for the delayed reply. For cmoney's comment, aside from pen and paper work, would it benefit your company if there was a tool that could automate what you are currently doing (if possible, and not highly customized where your process of doing this changes drastically with every design/environment change)? If so, I'd be interested to hear about it, on this blog or you can email me separately. I'm always looking for ways to increase user productivity, this seems to be a current one from companies I'm working with who are finding ways to stay on schedule. Pen and paper can be good, but sometimes, it may not scale well, be resource intensive, as well as other potential gotchas. For Valeriy's comment, I agree, it would be nice to have some correlation data between logic levels, timing delays and net lengths (or maybe have a tool to do this with preliminary project data, abstract this quickly instead of in embedded reports, maybe there is ... , so you can make better decisions based on your design and environment for your project). One of my managers who runs the synthesis team, Jeff, who had previously done a lot of work in just the LoL gave some sound advice that due to a number of factors, this quickly becomes a very complex problem to solve. (i.e. even with a generic sound solution, it may not fit every design situation, for example, the advent of even more geometry shrinks where net lengths may become more dominant) Back to your point, adding to LoL, timing and net would better complete the picture, although this would be later in the process, maybe even post RTL freeze which might not be the initial intent of using the LoL strategy. Personally, I know the previous large vendor I worked with (before joining Cadence) was adamant about LoL, and intially it was a pain. But looking back, it worked for us, and I don't regret that conscious effort that did take some initial schedule hits but made closing in the backend more predictable. Since I consistently still see today that P&R tools in general are not always perfect (one-pass flow is still a wishful concept to me, I sure hope no EDA company is promoting that ...), overall I believe that this discussion is useful, keep us thing - what can we do better. (instead of accepting what EDA vendors give, and manually hacking to create non-scalable and non-repeatable solutions) Thanks again for both of your comments.
Someone should make a research on correlation between logic levels, timing delays and net lengths in a few real designs. I guess that delays are quite correlated with lengths, but what about levels and lengths? Maybe nowaday tools are so perfect in optimal placing and routing that many levels of logic don't mean lengthy nets and vice versa?
I'm a front end logic designer for chipsets, a multi-billion dollar business, and we do this, to some degree. We have no official report or official rules given to us by the back end team, but rather we do a lot of pen and paper work to figure out logic levels on paths that may be close. It's proved useful and fairly accurate over the years.