Stats

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 10
  • Subscribers 91
  • Views 15796
  • 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

How to connect endcap cell vertically in soc encounter?

Renee

" mce_src="" alt="end cell leftend rightend" border="" hspace="" vspace="" width="" height="" align="" />

  I had some problems with soc encounter's endcap cells.

    In the design, after adding endcap cells to the each end of the row, I want end cells on each row to be connected vertically, for example, left_end_cell1 on row 1 to connect to left_end_cell2 on row 2 and they are both connected to vdd!. 


   As a experiment, I created two cells: ENDCAPL  and ENDCAPR, which contained only nwell, power/ground rails and metal2 pins as vdd! and gnd!, but in soc encounter, when I did sroute, it still route horizontally to the ring, not connecting endcells vertically.

  If I can route power/ground nets like shown in the attached file, then I should use cells as leftend and rightend to do power distribution.
 
 How can I make it connect power/ground nets vertically?

 Thank you very much!

Parents

  • Hi Renee, 

     In general, if you have nets that are connected ONLY by abutment, then you should put a -skip_routing attribute on them:

    setAttribute -net net1 -skip_routing true

    It's hard to tell from just a picture, but it seems like nano is trying to route your abutment nets, and in doing so, crosses the cells, creating violations. Does that seem like what's going on to you? Do your filler cells continue the clock, nReset, and scan connections? Do you add them before routing? If fillers aren't being added to the gap, and there's nothing blocking them (like routing or placement blockage), then it's usually because you don't have a filler cell that's small enough. But you said they got put in correctly before, so something else may be going on.

    For the other routes (between an endcap and the one below it), was your hand-routing successful? Sometimes trying to route by hand will show the cause of why the router couldn't connect the net. 

    - Kari 

Reply

  • Hi Renee, 

     In general, if you have nets that are connected ONLY by abutment, then you should put a -skip_routing attribute on them:

    setAttribute -net net1 -skip_routing true

    It's hard to tell from just a picture, but it seems like nano is trying to route your abutment nets, and in doing so, crosses the cells, creating violations. Does that seem like what's going on to you? Do your filler cells continue the clock, nReset, and scan connections? Do you add them before routing? If fillers aren't being added to the gap, and there's nothing blocking them (like routing or placement blockage), then it's usually because you don't have a filler cell that's small enough. But you said they got put in correctly before, so something else may be going on.

    For the other routes (between an endcap and the one below it), was your hand-routing successful? Sometimes trying to route by hand will show the cause of why the router couldn't connect the net. 

    - Kari 

Children
No Data

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.