• 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. Terminal in CDF termOder is invalid (CDL netlist)

Stats

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6
  • Subscribers 125
  • Views 17528
  • 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

Terminal in CDF termOder is invalid (CDL netlist)

PatrikOsgnach
PatrikOsgnach over 6 years ago

Hello all,

I'm trying to debug an annoying problem concerning the CDL netlist of a small testbench.

In netlister's log I see:

WARNING (AUCDL-43): Terminal VDD appearing in CDF termOrder for
component : ABC
in cellview : symbol
of library : XYZ
is invalid.
Ensure that this CDF has same terminal names as specified in this cell view.
Nets will be printed in default terminal order for this component.

This happens with virtuoso ICADV 12.3.500.23. That symbol view definitely has a VDD terminal and so does the schematic view.

Since this is a read-only cell for me, I cannot run a chek&save, nor can I change the data.dm file.

Do you have any advice about how to debug such problem? (e.g. why is VDD invalid)

Best regards,

Patrik

  • Cancel
  • Andrew Beckett
    Andrew Beckett over 6 years ago

    Hi Patrik,

    Not entirely sure why this would happen, but I would check the auCdl simulation information in the CDF for the component (Tools->CDF->Edit for the cell in question), and then compare the terminals on both the placed view (typically the symbol) and the switch view (which might be auCdl if it's a stopping view, or schematic if not) and make sure they are all consistent.

    If that doesn't identify the issue, please contact customer support so that we can take a look. I can't think of anything recent that might cause such an issue, so hopefully it's something that can be resolved by looking at the data.

    Regards,

    Andrew.

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • PatrikOsgnach
    PatrikOsgnach over 6 years ago in reply to Andrew Beckett

    Hello Andrew,

    actually what happened is that the cellview where ABC was being instantiated had a lot of floating nets and not all ABC's ports were connected. We fixed the schematic and the issue can be considered solved.

    Still, the message from the netlister is misleading, as it seems that the issue lies with ABC itself and not the schematic where it is instantiated. Also, it is not obvious what could make a terminal invalid.

    Anyway, thanks for the efforts and best regards,

    Patrik

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • Andrew Beckett
    Andrew Beckett over 6 years ago in reply to PatrikOsgnach

    Hi Patrik,

    Thinking about this, I suspect it may have been that you had the symbol instantiated when it had fewer pins originally, and then new pins were added later. the schematic containing the instance of ABC then had fewer instTerms and the missing terminals weren't there. Probably doing a check-and-save would fix it. You'd also get a warning when opening the schematic telling you that the symbol was newer than the last time it was checked.

    Anyway, glad you've solved it now. The above is just a wild guess without having seen the issue (so it might be something else altogether).

    Andrew.

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • PatrikOsgnach
    PatrikOsgnach over 6 years ago in reply to Andrew Beckett

    Hello Andrew,

    I believe the symbol pins were never changed, but looking at the schematic, I would say that it was that the cellview where ABC was instantiated was created by a script.
    I can't believe a human designer would leave all the pins unconnected. It's a pity that the netlister complained about ABC itself and not about the cellview where it is instantiated. I found the root problem because I was running an LVS and some cells could not be compared, for no apparent reason.

    Best regards,

    Patrik

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • Andrew Beckett
    Andrew Beckett over 6 years ago in reply to PatrikOsgnach

    Hi Patrik,

    I completely agree that any error messages should be clear and pinpoint the problem - probably the best thing would be if you could provide the example (to customer support) which had the specific problem so we can check and ensure the error message is as specific as it can be. I could guess at putting together a testcase, but I wouldn't be sure I'd be seeing what you were seeing.

    Andrew.

    • Cancel
    • Vote Up 0 Vote Down
    • Cancel
  • PatrikOsgnach
    PatrikOsgnach over 6 years ago in reply to Andrew Beckett

    Hello Andrew,

    I'll see what I can do. There is a lot of IPs in these testcases.

    BR,

    Patrik 

    • 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