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
In part 1 of this blog, I discussed a scenario that PCB designers working with FPGA-based boards are often faced with: getting pin assignments from FPGA and/or schematic engineers that can create serious PCB routing problems. In that blog I claimed that the upstream engineers can't accurately assess the impacts of their FPGA pin selections on the PCB partially because the tools they use don't consider the PCB. As a result, the team can sometimes spend weeks trying to reach closure on system-optimal FPGA pin assignments. And I proposed that the solution is to bring the PCB knowledge to the front-end engineers and give the PCB designer the power and knowledge to make valid changes to the FPGA pin assignments.
To demonstrate this scenario, in the first blog I created a simple, two-FPGA design, with an interconnected 32-bit data bus. In part 2 of this blog, I will take this design into the PCB tool and see what happens as the PCB designer attempts to route it.
Figure 1 - The FPGA designer's PCB placement assumption
If the PCB layout matches what the FPGA designer assumed, the PCB designer should have no problems routing the connections. But what happens if the FPGAs can't be placed side by side for some reason - maybe another component needs to occupy the space - and the PCB designer needs to place the FPGAs vertically?
Figure 2 - The PCB designer's placement needs
Or maybe the side-by-side placement is fine but there is a hole in the board between the FPGAs, and the signals have to flow into the top of the FPGA on the left.
Figure 3 - A hole that affects the PCB bundle flow
This could not, or may not, have been anticipated when the pins were first being assigned. Certainly the FPGA designer and schematic engineer wouldn't have planned for it because they are not directly dealing with PCB routing, and neither they nor the tools they use have any in-depth knowledge of the PCB layout.
Now the pin assignments have too many crossovers and don't look so good from a routing perspective. And in a typical flow, the PCB designer is probably going to be forced to go back to the FPGA designer to negotiate pin swaps, which means the schematic engineer is also going to have to get involved (those "finished" schematics are now no longer finished).
But what if the PCB designer had been involved with the FPGA pin planning from the very start? What if he could take the FPGA-related subsystem, with the existing pin assignments, plan the placement and signal flows, and then use this knowledge to propose better pin assignments? What if the PCB designer had the technology, within the PCB tool itself, to use an FPGA-intelligent algorithm that could automatically re-assign the pins based on how the signals enter the FPGA? Not a static swap matrix that only understands that two signals are part of the same swap group and knows nothing about the FPGA itself, but an engine, running under the PCB hood, like a built-in FPGA expert.
Let's see what could be accomplished by using Cadence's Allegro/OrCAD FPGA System Planner (FSP) engine, within Allegro PCB Editor.
Figure 4 - Using the Allegro/OrCAD FPGA System Planner engine to assign new FPGA pins
By selecting the bundle and using Allegro/OrCAD FPGA System Planner's FPGA knowledge and pin swapping algorithm to reassign the signals on the left FPGA, not only have better (with respect to PCB routing) pins been chosen for the FPGA, the signals have been unraveled, which translates into faster routing on fewer layers:
Figure 5 - FPGA pin reassignment on FPGA U1
The same algorithm could be applied to the FPGA on the right:
Figure 6 - FPGA pin reassignment on FPGA U2
Notice how some signals on the right-hand FPGA tend to occupy the top center of the FPGA. This is, in some cases, to be expected - in this case the pins on the top left quadrant of this particular FPGA consist of power, configuration, and differential pins. But since the Allegro/OrCAD FSP engine has full knowledge of the FPGA and the device's pin characteristics, it has automatically picked pins that adhere to the FPGA's capabilities.
There is no way that a static swap mechanism can support this level of FPGA knowledge. Classic pin swapping technology has barely evolved beyond a rudimentary scheme where groups of pins are tagged as being logically and/or electrically equivalent. For fixed-pin parts, this works fine. But for FPGAs, the pin usage rules change as the connectivity to the FPGA changes and a simple swap group approach cannot possibly account for this. Even if it could, to accomplish the degree of re-optimization highlighted above the PCB designer would have had to spend hours manually moving signals one at a time.
Now that the PCB designer has a signal flow and pin assignments that appear to support the actual routing, what does this look like to the FPGA designer, whose tools do not consider the signal flow on the PCB?
Figure 7 - PCB-optimal pin assignments as seen by the FPGA designer
Without knowledge of how the signals would eventually be flowed on the PCB, it is highly unlikely that the FPGA designer would have chosen the pin assignments shown above. To him, they make no sense - there are multiple crossovers, the "traces" appear to be longer than they need to be, and the FPGA pins don't appear to be well-utilized. But that is irrelevant. If the resulting pin assignments work for the FPGA and the PCB designer's needs have been met, the end result will be a more optimal design that will be routable in less time and with fewer layers.
A short video that demonstrates the scenario above can be found here. Also, I will be hosting a webinar on September 12th, 2013, where I will give a demonstration and expand on the concepts I have discussed in parts 1 and 2 of this blog, using a more complex design than the example I've used here. Click here to register for the webinar.