I think <@U01732WNM60> was talking about latchup r...
# chipalooza
l
I think @Christoph Maier was talking about latchup rules. They are checked alongside antenna rules in some flows. Some rules for transistors inside deep n wells can be nasty. I have a question, @Tim Edwards. Should the substrate, outside the nwell, be connected to dvss? Where? Won't it cause shorts to other supply pins?
👍 2
1
t
Yes to all questions. Currently there is an irritating issue with the caravel user projects in that the SoC's digital ground is the effective substrate under the entire user area, except that the SoC's
vssd
domain does not actually connect (by pin) to the user project. Mitch Bailey has been working up a solution drawing isolated substrate cuts around the user area; with this solution, you can assume any ground domain you want for the substrate as long as you're consistent. ("isosub" is the layer name in magic that generates a virtual isolated substrate area or "subcut").
vssd1
is probably the most obvious choice for the user area substrate. Within the padframe, the
vssa
domains are all properly isolated with deep nwells. However, there is no specific isolation between any
vssd
domain and the
vssio
domain other than virtual isolation created by subcuts.
1
Sky130 doesn't have any particularly obnoxious rules regarding transistors in deep nwell. In fact, they don't even have unique device models for transistors in deep nwell, which is a common practice that I always find highly suspect.
1