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.
u can get me the logic for this,
I have two layout, they has to be compared and difference has to be given. I have done till getting the shapes and their corresponding metal layers & coordinates.Iam not able move further
Can you please try to write using proper English words? There's no tax on characters in the forum, and using SMS abbreviations is unnecessary. "Frn'z" and "u" make it harder to read. This comment is aimed not just at you, but all people who use the forum - some of us find it really hard to read such strange abbreviations.
Anyway, the conventional way to do this kind of comparison is to do an XOR (Exclusive OR) in a physical verfication tool, such as Assura, PVS or Calibre. Writing the rule deck is generally pretty easy for these tools - consult the documentation.
It will almost certainly be much easier to write the rules, and faster to run, than trying to write some SKILL to do it. You could use functions like leLayerXor() or dbLayerXor() in SKILL, but I think using a physical verification tool is by far the most efficient.
I guess you have imported the streamfiles by streamin.
I think it's difficult to publish the code, but it could be an inspiration:
On our site we are using a own skill programm, which compares two layouts by using divaDRC.
It tempoary makes flattened copies of each layout and after that it perfomes saveDerived( (geomXor (geomGetPurpose "layername" "purpose" 0 20)) "layername purpose") for each desired layer/purpose name.
After all we get a layout with all differences marked as DRC-errors
In reply to Bernd das Brot:
Why does it need to flatten both the layouts?
I wrote an app note on doing this in Diva years ago (it was for 4.3.4, so that shows how long ago it was), but I never updated it for 4.4 (let alone IC6) and I can't locate the app note any more (it was probably 14 years ago...). But I can't see why you need to flatten both layouts.
If I remember rightly, I did something in Diva by the following flow (roughly):
With Assura, Dracula, PVS and Calibre it's easier because they directly support having two different databases, whereas with Diva you only have a single database, which complicates matters slightly.
I seem to remember my app note had some scripts to automate adding the purposes and building the rule deck, and then some SKILL to do the above steps - but it's not exactly difficult. If you're using one of the other physical verificatioiin tools, it's simpler still.
In reply to Andrew Beckett:
In reply to Quek:
Hi, back when i used Diva i had written a simple DRC like this:
saveDerived( geomXor(list( "m1" "drawing" ) ) "m1 dg mismatch")
with a line for each relevent layer.
I'd place my two layout views (streamed back in gds's) co-incidentally with same origin in a new layout view then run the DRC.
I'm sure there are more elegant ways but it did the trick for me.
If you are using PVS i notice there is an XOR option in the menu, have not tried it personally yet.