Stats

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 13
  • Subscribers 61
  • Views 18684
  • 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

PLE adjusting in Rtl compiler

archive

Hi guys,

Does anybody know how to adjust PLE setting in RTL compiler so it will be more in line with encounter results?

I heard somebody talk about it, but he is not available now.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Manzur.


Originally posted in cdnusers.org by myazdani
Parents

  • Hi Cristiano,

    I tried to find out myself but, as you may have found out, R&D keeps this recipie pretty tight to their belt - understandably so. The information I was provided is pretty similar to what jflieder mentioned. The is no doubt in my mind that using some of the physical information available early on is the right approach. In addition to jflieder's comment I would like to point out the following:
    + PLEs are dynamic so every time RC picks a different architecture the consequences on net topology are recomputed
    This is a key difference with WLM which is static in nature
    + I have seen no noticeable impact on runtime or memory usage
    + PLEs can be more localized since they are not bound by hierarchy and fanout only as I understand this
    + In my experience it is a single iteration approach as opposed to constantly tweaking CWLMs over iterations
    + On the designs I have run, PLEs have produce better or comparable results
    One issue I have run into is that it has required a little more dilligence at reviewing all the collateral since now I do not only have to review the .libs but also the physical files. Probably not such a bad thing since we have to review them at some point and better earlier than later.

    good luck,
    GH-


    Originally posted in cdnusers.org by grasshopper
Reply

  • Hi Cristiano,

    I tried to find out myself but, as you may have found out, R&D keeps this recipie pretty tight to their belt - understandably so. The information I was provided is pretty similar to what jflieder mentioned. The is no doubt in my mind that using some of the physical information available early on is the right approach. In addition to jflieder's comment I would like to point out the following:
    + PLEs are dynamic so every time RC picks a different architecture the consequences on net topology are recomputed
    This is a key difference with WLM which is static in nature
    + I have seen no noticeable impact on runtime or memory usage
    + PLEs can be more localized since they are not bound by hierarchy and fanout only as I understand this
    + In my experience it is a single iteration approach as opposed to constantly tweaking CWLMs over iterations
    + On the designs I have run, PLEs have produce better or comparable results
    One issue I have run into is that it has required a little more dilligence at reviewing all the collateral since now I do not only have to review the .libs but also the physical files. Probably not such a bad thing since we have to review them at some point and better earlier than later.

    good luck,
    GH-


    Originally posted in cdnusers.org by grasshopper
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.