-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 578
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
sky130_fd_sc_hd__fa_4 pin access issue #580
Comments
Test case: fa_4-pin-access.tar.gz |
I'm chasing a different skywater issue now but I'll get to this in a while. |
I narrowed down the issue to the magic.lef adding an mcon layer to the pins. eg the PIN A differences:
If I remove the mcon layer from the cell, the original openlane issue goes away |
That lef makes no sense. It implies a bare cut since there is no met1 shape above it. What does the cell actually look like? At most I think we should add an error on such a lef; I don't think the router should support it. |
Thanks for isolating the problem :) |
No problem. I don't understand the differences between the base |
The ".lef" files are those that were given to us by the foundry. The ".magic.lef" files were those generated by reading GDS in magic, annotating with the CDL netlist and/or the foundry LEF, and writing out LEF. If you are having to distinguish between files in skywater-pdk, then you're not doing what you should be doing, which is letting open_pdks install the libraries and then using those. That gives you another entire layer of control between what's in the PDK and what the tools see. |
@RTimothyEdwards I was just trying to understand why the The |
@RTimothyEdwards do the gds files have bare cuts in them with no top enclosure? |
@maliberty: The above LEF(s) lists the met1 shapes you're looking for in a separate |
@ax3ghazy @RTimothyEdwards why are you using multiple PORTS in this case? The pin shapes look strongly connected by met1. This cell has 5 non-power pins but the image looks like just two. Is this a partial snapshot or am I missing something. |
@maliberty it is a partial snapshot. Here is a complete screenshot of the magic derived LEF: |
@maliberty : Looks like the last time the files in the PDK were updated was quite a long time ago. Magic does not generate multiple ports there any more; that was a bug that was fixed a while back. |
This is what the LEF file looks like generated with magic currently: |
@antonblanchard would you test this with the current lef provided above. |
In general TR wants to drop vias onto standard cell pins and doesn't really like to do planar access for them. That is an area that could be improved. |
@maliberty The updated LEF from @RTimothyEdwards did fix my issue. I've opened a bug against the Skywater PDK |
We are hitting pin access issues with a few cells when using openlane. An example using
sky130_fd_sc_hd__fa_4
is attached. Runningopenlane test.tcl
gives:I couldn't make it fail using the OpenROAD flow start to finish, and I narrowed it down to the definiton of
sky130_fd_sc_hd__fa_4
in the lef, which is slightly different between the two flows. It looks like open_pdks is picking up the magic version of the lef from the skywater repo, but I'm not 100% sure.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: