<@U017FMP2MJN> / <@U017SU9AJBH> Something like thi...
# analog-design
@User / @User Something like this ->


👍 1
Thanks! I am guessing that the drawings were a suggestion of a PCB layout, which is a great thing to think about now. I quite like the supply stuff being in the middle. I think RF/analog people will mostly not use the IO in "banks" and will want to choose the ball allocation part-way through doing the layout process. I would prefer to have freedom to reallocate the balls on the periphery (or even delete some of them, if it helps), and keep any fixed ball allocations like the supply for the harness stuff in the middle, plus one edge of the package for the harness IO. My preference would be for you to make few/no assumptions about what people want, and just provide a template with the ball and redistribution layer layout for the part that you need for the harness, (and maybe a suggested example with all balls as digital IO for digital designers to use if they just want that). Then people could include the redistribution and polyimide and ball layers as part of their tape-out just like any other layer, with whatever pinout they like. If you want to encourage a standard pinout to be used whenever there is no reason to do otherwise, you could provide a Kicad layout for a standard PCB breakout board. Doing that PCB layout before the chip tape-out might also be a good way to catch any gotchas in the ball allocation too. BTW Your suggested layout has the nice property that by reallocating or not using some balls on the periphery, the supplies in the middle could be shorted to some balls on the periphery in a way that allows a PCB layout with no vias at all, which might be handy in some weird use cases like chip-on-glass or metal-backed PCBs for high power products.