Output to SPF?

[Matt]

I have a layout that I made with the NCSU cadence design kit. I DRCed,
LVSed and extracted my design. I now want to use UltraSim to simulate
the back-annotated design. I have UltraSim working without
back-annotation, but I'm wondering the best way to go about the
back-annotation. If I select my "extracted" design in UltraSim, then I
do not have the stimuli that I added explicitly to my schematic. The
other option is to get an SPF file and use that in UltraSim. First, how
do I get an SPF file from an extracted cell view? Second, how do I add
the ".usim_opt spf = \" \"" option to UltraSim through the analog
artist GUI?

Thanks,
Matt

 

[Bernd Fischer]

If I select my "extracted" design in UltraSim, then I
do not have the stimuli that I added explicitly to my schematic.

Why?
Why can you not have a top cell, lets call it testbench, which includes your
stimuli, I guess you use sources from analogLib, your design to test placed
there as symbol. And then relpace the schematic of your design to test with the
extracted view, for the netlister to pick.
A good thin is to use the Hierarchy Editor (HED) with an configuration view
for that.

Bernd

 

[Matt]

For two different reasons (I have two different tasks/goals.):

1) I want to use SPF in PrimeTime and modify it for some experiments.

2) I did not know how to instantiate an extracted cell view in a
schematic... how do you "replace the schematic of your design to test
with the extracted view"?

Thanks,
Matt


Bernd Fischer wrote:

If I select my "extracted" design in UltraSim, then I
do not have the stimuli that I added explicitly to my schematic.

Why?
Why can you not have a top cell, lets call it testbench, which includes your
stimuli, I guess you use sources from analogLib, your design to test placed
there as symbol. And then relpace the schematic of your design to test with the
extracted view, for the netlister to pick.
A good thin is to use the Hierarchy Editor (HED) with an configuration view
for that.

Bernd

 

[Bernd Fischer]

For two different reasons (I have two different tasks/goals.):

1) I want to use SPF in PrimeTime and modify it for some experiments.

There is no possibility as far as I know to generate SPF form a extracted view.
You have to check if your extraction tool, don't know which, can generate DSPF
or SPEF if you want to further with PrimeTime.

2) I did not know how to instantiate an extracted cell view in a
schematic... how do you "replace the schematic of your design to test
with the extracted view"?

You have to create a config view for your top level schematic and use the
Hierarchy Editor for that, some sort of design partitioning tool.
Check the docs.

Bernd

 

[Matt]

Since there are 10,000 (at least) pages of documentation, if anyone
else is curious, there is a "Cadence Parasitic Simulation User Guide".
For example,
http://adsi.ee.ntu.edu.tw/rfdoc5/parasim/chap1.html#1032918

Matt

Bernd Fischer wrote:

For two different reasons (I have two different tasks/goals.):

1) I want to use SPF in PrimeTime and modify it for some experiments.

There is no possibility as far as I know to generate SPF form a extracted view.
You have to check if your extraction tool, don't know which, can generate DSPF
or SPEF if you want to further with PrimeTime.

2) I did not know how to instantiate an extracted cell view in a
schematic... how do you "replace the schematic of your design to test
with the extracted view"?

You have to create a config view for your top level schematic and use the
Hierarchy Editor for that, some sort of design partitioning tool.
Check the docs.

Bernd

 

[Bernd Fischer]

Since there are 10,000 (at least) pages of documentation

"cdsdoc" the documentation UI offers a keyword search, just similar to Google,
or how did you find the the link?

By the way if you look for Cadence Docs n the web you'll never know if they
are up to date or old stuff.

Bernd

 

[Bernd Fischer]

Just as a hint.

http://adsi.ee.ntu.edu.tw/rfdoc5/parasim/titlecopy.html

I'm personally are not that familiar with US copyright laws.
But don't know if they would like that their documentations
will be made public in the internet on oter severs than theirs!?

Bernd

 

[Andrew Beckett]

On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:16:14 +0200, Bernd Fischer
<bernd.fischer@xignalerif.r'4054-50];p5.de> wrote:

Just as a hint.

....snipped web site URL...

I'm personally are not that familiar with US copyright laws.
But don't know if they would like that their documentations
will be made public in the internet on oter severs than theirs!?

Bernd

I was just about to say something similar. Publishing Cadence documentation on
the web is in direct violation of the license agreement. We are aware of this
particular violating site, and our lawyers are contacting the university in
question to get this removed.

I would encourage posters in this forum to not further violate the license
agreement by giving references to such web sites. By all means give the URL on
sourcelink where the documentation lives - this requires a valid sourcelink
account to be able to access the documentation - or point at where the
documentation is within a Cadence hierarchy (this is what I tend to do).

Andrew.
--
Andrew Beckett
Principal European Technology Leader
Cadence Design Systems, UK.

 

[Matt]

Hi Bernd,

It helps to know the keywords, however. Searching for "parasitic" or
"backannotate" is useless...
It is also not obvious where this manual is located in cdsdoc. There
are typically a half dozen tools that do the same thing (Hyperextract,
Diva, Assura, etc.), so simply asking which is the best usually saves
hours or days of time.

Thanks for your help.

Matt

Bernd Fischer wrote:

Since there are 10,000 (at least) pages of documentation

"cdsdoc" the documentation UI offers a keyword search, just similar to Google,
or how did you find the the link?

By the way if you look for Cadence Docs n the web you'll never know if they
are up to date or old stuff.

Bernd

 

[Svenn Are Bjerkem]

Andrew Beckett wrote:

I would encourage posters in this forum to not further violate the license
agreement by giving references to such web sites. By all means give the URL on
sourcelink where the documentation lives - this requires a valid sourcelink
account to be able to access the documentation - or point at where the
documentation is within a Cadence hierarchy (this is what I tend to do).

I guess this means an end to "any" quoting of Cadence documentation? I
mean there is a big difference between putting the doc on the net and a
bit of cut-and-paste to clarify an answer. My last answer on the
Fortran in Spectre thread was quite clear an example on that: Telling
somebody to have a look at appendix c in spectreuser seem quite simple,
but appendix c on 5.1.41 is totally different than appendix c in later
versions.

--
Svenn

 

[Svenn Are Bjerkem]

Matt wrote:

Hi Bernd,

It helps to know the keywords, however. Searching for "parasitic" or
"backannotate" is useless...

Asking those questions give the more support-oriented minds in the
group the opportunity to practice the Sourcelink and Groops searching
abilities.

It is also not obvious where this manual is located in cdsdoc. There
are typically a half dozen tools that do the same thing (Hyperextract,
Diva, Assura, etc.), so simply asking which is the best usually saves
hours or days of time.

That is why many companies pay a little extra for people with
experience with Cadence, or prefer an engineer with Cadence experience
to an engineer without it in case the rest of their abilities are the
same level. Knowing where to look for whatever is sometimes better than
knowing whatever.

If you wouldn't mind to extend your Sourcelink search to "parasitic
backannotate ultrasim" you will get a 100% hit on a document that
explains you what to do. I would really like to add a quote from the
manual here, but to avoid the Cadence lawyers I will tell you that it
is in the parasim.pdf for 5.1.41. When you have the page in front of
you do a search for ultrasim, and you will get to the info you need. (I
hope)

--
Svenn

 

[Andrew Beckett]

On 12 Oct 2006 16:57:56 -0700, "Svenn Are Bjerkem" <svenn.are@bjerkem.de> wrote:

Andrew Beckett wrote:
I would encourage posters in this forum to not further violate the license
agreement by giving references to such web sites. By all means give the URL on
sourcelink where the documentation lives - this requires a valid sourcelink
account to be able to access the documentation - or point at where the
documentation is within a Cadence hierarchy (this is what I tend to do).

I guess this means an end to "any" quoting of Cadence documentation? I
mean there is a big difference between putting the doc on the net and a
bit of cut-and-paste to clarify an answer. My last answer on the
Fortran in Spectre thread was quite clear an example on that: Telling
somebody to have a look at appendix c in spectreuser seem quite simple,
but appendix c on 5.1.41 is totally different than appendix c in later
versions.

Reasonable quoting is reasonable... the objection is really to posting of whole
documents. The best thing is to give the reference - anyone who is going to use
the information will have access to the documentation. Anyone who doesn't have
the documentation doesn't have a valid reason to know!

Andrew.
--
Andrew Beckett
Principal European Technology Leader
Cadence Design Systems, UK.