Cadence® system design and verification solutions, integrated under our System Development Suite, provide the simulation, acceleration, emulation, and management capabilities.
System Development 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.
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.
Get the most out of your investment in Cadence technologies through a wide range of training offerings.
This course combines our Allegro PCB Editor Basic Techniques, followed by Allegro PCB Editor Intermediate Techniques.
Virtuoso Analog Design Environment Verifier 16.7
Learn learn to perform requirements-driven analog verification using the Virtuoso ADE Verifier tool.
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 technlogy. 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.
When I synthesize my designs, RTL compiler exchanges the internal signals' names for random ones. Does anyone know if there is a way to keep the internal signals' names? Or, is there a way to map the old names to the new ones?
I'll try to explain my problem in a better way.
I'm using PSL to verify the functioning of my design and I map internal signals to external ones (using ncmirror) in order to be able to evaluate them in PSL. When I'm using RTL that's ok, but when I have to verify the generated netlist, RTL compiler keeps the port's names but changes the name of some signals.
For example, if I map a signal which name is tmod_s in my PSL, after synthesis this signal's name is changed for something like n_25 and my PSL does not work anymore.
I've tried the following command before elaboration but I didn't have success:
set_attr preserve true -net
I've tryied to preserve the signal count_enable_s which is set as following:
count_enable_s <= '1' when pre_count_s = conv_unsigned(11,4) else '0';
In fact, observing the elaboration result I realized it was transformed in a MUX, and its output was named to n_26. Is there a way to keep the output with the name count_enable_s instead of n_26?
OK, I'm not exactly an expert in the matter, but would you not want to verify the "design" at the RTL level using PSL, and then if you do not trust your synthesis tool - or if you had to make changes to the synthesized design manually, then use an equivalence checking tool?Cheers,G.O.
Hi mvetromille,Preserving all internal signals would also prevent any structural optimizations during synthesis, so I am not sure if you really want this. However, I can inagine that you are able to preserve at least the port names of internal blocks, not signals, did you try that? If this is possible then the recommendation would be to write properties only using the internal port names. Otherwise the flow breaks.Joerg.
Thank you, Joerg.In fact, I don't know if it would be an impact to my design if I prevent structural optimizations during synthesis. I really need to use the internal signals in my properties instead of the ports. So, not considering the optimization after synthesis, do you know how to preserve the name of some internal signals?Melissa.
Hi Melissa, This is more of a RTL compiler question and perhaps you should ask in the Digital IC forum for synthesis experts comments. As Joerg mentioned, it will be a good idea to write PSL on ports only - especially for those properties expected to be reused at GLS.We make some of these recommendations in our PSL book (see: www.systemverilog.us). Another relevant guideline was to use only Sequential nodes in your PSL code - in your case you are lucky that the combinatorial nodes are still present. We have seen cases where the whole logic gets optimized and the signal is lost. We at CVC have a half-a-day workshop on "ABV beyond RTL" that touches upon this topic very extensively, provides examples on how to handle common synthesis optimizations (like bit blasting etc.). It also provides template flow on how to use an equivalence checker to automate this kind of mapping.Perhaps Conformal can provide a flow for this if you work closely with you Cadence AE.RegardsAjeetha, CVCwww.noveldv.com