Hi all, could there be a case where Netgen shows a device mismatch despite all the pin names and fan...
n
Hi all, could there be a case where Netgen shows a device mismatch despite all the pin names and fanouts seemingly being a perfect match?
m
@Noah Moroze Can you post the netgen output?
n
Yup, here it is!
m
@Noah Moroze So it looks like your creating a whole new chip (not something that goes on the google/efabless/skywater shuttle). Is that correct? As @Tim Edwards mentioned, the VSUBS disconnected layout port on asic_core is probably one problem. It looks like your 2 port sram verilog is missing
clk1
and
csb1
inputs. These should probably be tied to ground if your not using the second port. The
vssd/vssio/vccd/vddio_hvc_pad
cells have unmatched ports
DRN_HCV
and
SRC_BDY_HVC
.
I'd suggest trying to get a clean LVS result for
asic_core
first. (You can use the same netlists, just change the top cells.)
n
@Mitch Bailey thanks for taking a look!
So it looks like your creating a whole new chip (not something that goes on the google/efabless/skywater shuttle). Is that correct?
this is correct!
those are good points!
asic_core
is LVS clean actually, but the point about the SRAM will be helpful for the design itself
also, interestingly, asic_core itself passes LVS, the top-level with asic_core abstracted with a LEF passes LVS, but without asic_core abstracted the whole thing does not pass
m
Is your repo open-source?
n
unfortunately not able to share at the moment. However, I was able to fix the problem! The issue seems to be related to the structure of the Verilog netlist. The original netlist came directly from Yosys synthesis, but if I take that Verilog file, read it in OpenROAD, and directly write it back out, the OpenROAD output passes LVS!
thanks for all your help!
👍 1