• Skip to main content
  • Skip to search
  • Skip to footer
Cadence Home
  • This search text may be transcribed, used, stored, or accessed by our third-party service providers per our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.

  1. Community Forums
  2. Custom IC Design
  3. not_gate verilogA model in ahdlLib

Stats

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3
  • Subscribers 125
  • Views 16276
  • Members are here 0
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

not_gate verilogA model in ahdlLib

VLSIiitm
VLSIiitm over 7 years ago

The following lines are in the verilogA model of "not_gate" in ahdlLib. I have marked 3 lines as A, B, C.


@ ( initial_step ) begin
... <<deleted lines>>
end

logic_in = V(vin) > vtrans; // line A

@ (cross(V(vin) - vtrans, 1))  logic_in = 1; // line B
@ (cross(V(vin) - vtrans, -1)) logic_in = 0; // line C


  • What is the reason for having both line A and lines (B,C)? Latter seem to imply the former unless the inputs don't cross the threshold at all during the transient simulation.
  • Would it have been enough to have line A within @(initial_step) begin  ... end?
  • If line A is indeed redundant, does having it slow things down because it is continuously evaluated?

Other gates have similar codes.

Thanks

Nagendra

  • Cancel
  • Andrew Beckett
    Andrew Beckett over 7 years ago

    Nagendra,

    One benefit is that this wouldn't have hidden states for SpectreRF because logic_in is updated on every timestep. Without line A, it would only get recorded on the crossings - so there would be no initial value, and SpectreRF would not be able to simulate it. The @cross is needed to ensure that there is a timestep at the transition.

    I probably would have written it just as:

    @(cross(V(vin)-vtrans)); // force timetep at transition (either direction)
    logic_in=V(vin)>vtrans;

    I don't think it will make any significant difference to the performance.

    Regards,

    Andrew.

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • VLSIiitm
    VLSIiitm over 7 years ago in reply to Andrew Beckett

    Thanks. Out of curiosity, will pss with initial transient(tstab) look at what is inside @(initial_step) begin ... end?

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • Andrew Beckett
    Andrew Beckett over 7 years ago in reply to VLSIiitm

    Yes, it should do. Note, I didn't actually test this model with pss - this is from visual inspection only...

    Regards,

    Andrew.

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel

Community Guidelines

The Cadence Design Communities support Cadence users and technologists interacting to exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices to solve problems and get the most from Cadence technology. 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. By accessing, contributing, using or downloading any materials from the site, you agree to be bound by the full Community Guidelines.

© 2025 Cadence Design Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy
  • Cookie Policy
  • US Trademarks
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information