I can t seem to get power to m

Question

< U01634FSETZ> < U016HSALFAN> I can t seem to get power to my pre hardened macros when building `user project wrapper` I ve pushed all of the updates to my repo that < U016HU5HK8V> was helping me with I have tried to flow `user project wrapper` with `mpw one a` and `mpw one b` openlane and pdks and it always results in the following LVS errors `vssd1 extra66 |vssd1 Mismatch ` `vccd1 extra69 |vccd1 Mismatch ` The mpw prechecker confirms this by failing the consistency check saying a macro isn t powered And a picture of the `user project wrapper` GDS below Could someone take a look at the configuration scripts in my repo and let me know what I m doing wrong For reference I use `make user project wrapper` to execute the flow

drr · Answer

I didn t spot the recent `CONNECT GRID` changes in your wrapper power config unless it isn t pushed example repo <https github com mattvenn caravel mph blob release openlane user project wrapper pdn tcl L30>

drr · Answer

I had power problems until that was added and configured properly

Matt Aamold · Answer

I ll try that

Matt Aamold · Answer

< drr> What exactly do I need to add to my config My pdn tcl is pretty different than the link you posted

drr · Answer

the interactive tcl seems to call that pdn tcl for each power domain here <https github com mattvenn caravel mph blob release openlane user project wrapper interactive tcl L48> but it only takes effect for the first power domain by unsetting `CONNECT GRID` after the first call

drr · Answer

it looks like the equivalent to that interactive tcl part is here <https github com SweeperAA caravel skywater130 decred miner blob master openlane user project wrapper gen pdn tcl L24>

Matt Aamold · Answer

So are you saying that I already have what s in the referenced repo

Matt Aamold · Answer

If I add the `if $ env CONNECT GRIDS ` statement I start getting syntax errors during the flow

Matt Aamold · Answer

Also do you have a picture of what the GDS should look like if the macro is powered

drr · Answer

gt So are you saying that I already have what s in the referenced repo I mean that config looks different but the equivalent call to the pdn gen seems to be that I am still figuring out how the PDN config works so take this with a grain of salt I m not sure if the ` WITH STRAPS` config is meant to prevent this problem I don t have that in my configs Might be best to confirm with whoever wrote the original config that this is based on

drr · Answer

here s what I had after fixing the LVS problems with power VPWR VGND are no longer shorted and only the 1 desired power domain is actually connected

drr · Answer

that view is the left side of my user proj within the wrapper All layers off except met4 5 vias met4 label to see VPWR GND

Matt Aamold · Answer

Double checking again but do pre hardened macros need the power pins specified As in `module decred hash macro ` ``ifdef USE POWER PINS` `inout vdda1 User area 1 3 3V supply` `inout vdda2 User area 2 3 3V supply` `inout vssa1 User area 1 analog ground` `inout vssa2 User area 2 analog ground` `inout vccd1 User area 1 1 8V supply` `inout vccd2 User area 2 1 8v supply` `inout vssd1 User area 1 digital ground` `inout vssd2 User area 2 digital ground` ``endif` One of my macros has this and one of them doesn t Besides being a bad inconsistency are these pins required in the macros

tnt · Answer

There was no `CONNECT GRI because it was using my twekaed pdn script that only generate straps from one of the rails

tnt · Answer

And the macros need the above if and only if you use the `mpw one b` way of doing things with no interactive tcl although even then you really need only `vccd1` and `vssd11` AFAIU If you use the older way then you need the name guarded block but with `VPWR` and `VGND`

tnt · Answer

Did you try the LEF thing

Matt Aamold · Answer

< tnt> I didn t go down the path of editing the LEF for two reasons 1 I was concerned that manual steps in this flow process would not be accepted as that s not what the tools do 2 I don t know how to do this or what it is intending to do I m looking at the lef now for one of my macros controller and there s two VPWR pins and one VGND pin The VPWR pin has two `RECT` in layer `met4` `RECT 174 640 10 640 176 240 187 920 ` `RECT 21 040 10 640 22 640 187 920 ` The VGND pin has one `RECT` in layer `met4` `RECT 97 840 10 640 99 440 187 920 ` What is it exactly that I am trying to accomplish here and for what reason

tnt · Answer

Just quick disclaimer first This is just my understanding of things I might be wrong this is my first ASIC too so I m just figuring things out Now my understanding is that because of a limitation bug in OpenDB there was some sort of work around put in place so that the multiple vertical stripes are exported by repeating the `PIN` multiple times in the LEF rather than having the pin having multiple `RECT` which would be the correct way Now AFAICS this seems to create those ` extraNNN` notations and I suspect this is what screws with LVS So what I m proposing is to fix the LEF into what it should be in the first place and define the `PIN` with multiple metal shapes as a single pin meaning hopefully all those will have the same net name `VPWR` and not `VPWR extraNNN`

Matt Aamold · Answer

What do you think is my best course of action at this point Should I wait and try to get < Amr Gouhar> and < Ahmed Ghazy> help on this or attempt to go down your path of editing the lef files

Matt Aamold · Answer

And by the way my other macro has 8 VPWR and 8 VGND pins

tnt · Answer

If it looks good in the GDS I wouldn t sweat it too much

Matt Aamold · Answer

The GDS looks like the picture I posted in this thread I don t think it looks good but correct me if I m wrong Also the prechecker is failing the consistency check that the macros are not powered

Amr Gouhar · Answer

< Ahmed Ghazy> Can you help out here because I m not sure what s the cleanest course of action is ^

Matt Aamold · Answer

For reference I added the power pins to `decred hash macro` and reflowed `user project wrapper` and my DRCs jumped from 0 to 48 so I m backing out the `decred hash macro` changes now `Metal5 spacing lt 1 6um met5 2 ` `Metal2 width lt 0 14um met2 1 `

Matt Aamold · Answer

< Ahmed Ghazy> < Amr Gouhar> I can be available to work on this just about any time with some notice Here is the current state I have pushed changes so that all macros are built under `mpw one b` openlane pdks etc I also changed all of the `user project wrapper` scripts to go to `mpw one b` default recommended approach as specified by the `mpw one b` `caravel` The macros themselves have 0 DRC 0 LVS errors `user project wrapper` now has 100 DRCs and 9 LVS errors `user project wrapper` also finishes the 64th iteration of detailed routing with 20 violations still There is no reason there should be any routing problems there s plenty of space Running the precheck on this after `make ship` results in `Consistency Checks Failed+ Reason Instance decred hash macro was not connected to any power in ` and 75 DRCs The `user project wrapper` reported DRCs are `Violation Message Metal4 gt 3um spacing to unrelated m4 lt 0 4um met4 5b found 8 Times ` `Violation Message Metal2 spacing lt 0 14um met2 2 found 8 Times ` `Violation Message Metal5 spacing lt 1 6um met5 2 found 78 Times ` `Violation Message Metal2 width lt 0 14um met2 1 found 6 Times ` The `user project wrapper` reported LVS violations are `Subcircuit summary ` `Circuit 1 user project wrapper |Circuit 2 user project wrapper` ` | ` `decred hash macro 4 |decred hash macro 4 ` `decred controller 1 |decred controller 1 ` `Number of devices 5 |Number of devices 5` `Number of nets 85 Mismatch |Number of nets 77 Mismatch ` ` ` `NET mismatches Class fragments follow with fanout counts ` `Circuit 1 user project wrapper |Circuit 2 user project wrapper` ` ` `Net decred hash block0 VPWR |Net vssd1` `decred hash macro VPWR = 1 | decred controller VGND = 1` `| decred hash macro VGND = 4` `|` `Net decred hash block0 VGND |Net vccd1` `decred hash macro VGND = 1 | decred controller VPWR = 1` `| decred hash macro VPWR = 4` `|` `Net decred hash block1 VPWR | no matching net ` `decred hash macro VPWR = 1 |` `|` `Net decred hash block2 VPWR | no matching net ` `decred hash macro VPWR = 1 |` `|` `Net decred hash block3 VPWR | no matching net ` `decred hash macro VPWR = 1 |` `|` `Net decred hash block1 VGND | no matching net ` `decred hash macro VGND = 1 |` `|` `Net decred hash block2 VGND | no matching net ` `decred hash macro VGND = 1 |` `|` `Net decred hash block3 VGND | no matching net ` `decred hash macro VGND = 1 |` `|` `Net decred controller block VPWR | no matching net ` `decred controller VPWR = 1 |` `|` `Net decred controller block VGND | no matching net ` `decred controller VGND = 1 |` ` ` `Netlists do not match ` `Netlists do not match `

Amr Gouhar · Answer

< Matt Aamold> can we zoom in like 30 minutes with < Ahmed Ghazy> as well

Matt Aamold · Answer

< Amr Gouhar> Yes I can I ve resolved the detailed routing violations Hopefully will have those pushed by that time

Matt Aamold · Answer

< Amr Gouhar> Latest updates to address detailed routing violations have been pushed 0 violations at 64th detailed routing iteration The `user project wrapper` now results in 63 DRCs and 9 LVS errors The new mpw precheck results in `Consistency Checks Failed+ Reason Instance decred hash macro was not connected to any power in ` `DRC Checks on MAG Failed Reason Total of DRC violations is 87` user project wrapper DRCs `Violation Message Metal4 gt 3um spacing to unrelated m4 lt 0 4um met4 5b found 11 Times ` `Violation Message Metal2 spacing lt 0 14um met2 2 found 14 Times ` `Violation Message Metal5 spacing lt 1 6um met5 2 found 38 Times ` `Total Magic DRC violations is 63` user project wrapper LVS Same as previous post