EDA place-and-route startup ATopTech out of the gates with Broadcom win
Roughly every four years, the EDA industry seems to deal the IC design community a new batch of place-and-route startups. Like clockwork, a new group is popping up now, and one of them—a not so stealthy implementation startup called ATopTech—wants to be the top of the class.
The company was founded in 2003 by a group of P&R developers with an impressive track record. The company’s lead executives include co-founders Don-Min Tsou, PhD, president of ATopTech, and Kaiwin Lee, CEO; well-noted architect Ping-San Tzeng; Eric Thune, VP of sales and marketing; and Eddie Araki, president of ATopTech KK in Japan. Many members of the ATopTech staff were former Avanti employees and were crucial to the development of that company’s Apollo and Astro place-and-route tools. Tzeng was the tool’s architect and went to Synopsys after it acquired Avanti and served as Synopsys fellow, before moving over to ATopTech to try to do it once more, create a leading edge place and route tool.
ATopTech’s Thune said the company quietly released the first version of its Aprisa floorplanning-to-GDSII system back in 2006 to early customers to get it ready for mass release. Thune said the tool suite is now ready for primetime and the company is launching Aprisa concurrently with a big win: Broadcom.
Rumors had been flying in the IC design community that Broadcom was evaluating new place and route systems, but which EDA company Broadcom finally picked remained elusive—at least until now.
Thune would not give nitty-gritty details of the agreement, but said Broadcom made a “very substantial” multimillion dollar, multi-year licensing deal with ATopTech. However, Thune agreed that it is not entirely replacing the incumbent implementation tool, which sources say is Magma. ATopTech claims to already have 5-plus tapeouts at 90 nm and 65 nm with several 45-nm designs under way, and counts Raza Microelectronics, in addition to Broadcom, among its early customers.
Thune claims that while in recent years the larger EDA vendors have been preoccupied with integrating DFM technologies into their flows, they have not been paying enough attention to their place and route tools and the problems their customers in P&R face.
“A lot of P&R tools broke at 65 nm,” said Thune. “They broke for a lot of reasons but one of the core reasons is we have lots of new challenges, such as OCV [on chip variation], MCMM [multi-corner multi-mode] issues, as well as exponential growth of design rules,” said Thune. “As a result of this, run time has exploded and designs are coming out that are not DRC [Design Rule Check] clean and are not fixable. And certainly one of the biggest issues we see is that timing doesn’t correlate to signoff tools. A legacy place and route tool may tell you it meets timing but when you get the design to signoff, engineers commonly find there are hundreds and thousands of violations that need to be fixed manually. As a result of all these, many design projects slip their schedules—not by a little, but by a lot.”
Thune said that a big problem considering the bulk of design groups haven’t moved to 65 nm, yet. “Big EDA vendors are sending patches to update their tools for 65 nm, but users don’t want a tool that goes back and fixes problems after the place and route tools make them, they want a P&R system that doesn’t create problems in the first place.”
With these problems in mind, ATopTech architects crafted a new system from scratch. The Aprisa system includes a floorplanner, placement tool, clock tree synthesis tool, global router and a detailed router, all using internal timing analysis and extraction engines.
Thune said the first step ATopTech architects took in creating the suite, was build Aprisa to take advantage of workstations using multi-core processors. Thune said the tool can handle more than 2 million instances, claiming a customer just finished a design that was 4 million instances flat. While the tool can handle designs that large, Thune said it maintains a reasonably small memory footprint.
The tool was also built around a proprietary database, rather than using Si2’s Open Access. Most startups in the implementation space today build their tools to use the OA common database to more freely interface to third party tools. But Thune said ATopTech went with a proprietary database rather than OA to highly tune runtime performance and tool interaction within Aprisa. “With the design’s we’re talking about, transferring files to an external database would just slow things down tremendously,” he said, noting the tool supports the typical formats such as LEF, DEF, .lib and SDF so if users for example want to use another floorplanner with suite, they can do so.
According to Thune, ATopTech architects also built into the tool native support for on-chip variation, multi-corner multi-mode design, multi-Vdd and voltage islands, all of which are commonly applied in advanced designs. Aprisa, he said, also natively supports DFM requirements and implements features such as double vias, wire spreading, end of line, and min edge.
“All of these new designs are low power designs so things like multi-Vdd and voltage islands need to be handled very smoothly in the design flow,” Thune said. “If you look at legacy tools, designers actually are forced to create levels of hierarchy to support these—it’s very painful. We’ve made it easy to implement.”
But the key technology of the Aprisa system is what ATopTech calls its Interconnect Centric Precision Optimization. “A lot of tools today use margin-based over optimization to compensate for 65-nm challenges,” said Thune. “The cause of that is that most of the physical optimization done in tools today is based on estimated parastics. The result is a lot of the fills get oversized to try to prevent signal integrity problems up front, but the penalty for this is you run into much longer run times, much larger cell counts and higher power usage.”
Thune said ICPO runs throughout the Aprisa flow. “We’re doing it during placement, clock-tree synthesis, global route and detailed route,” he said. “The optimization is based on much more precise parasitic and signal integrity information, and we average parasitic in the placement phase so we don’t do this over optimization up front.” Thune said the tool includes a 2.5-D extraction engine that provides the data for ICPO.
Another key feature of the tool is its speedy internal timing engine. Thune said the tool can run approximately a million instances in 5 minutes, boosted in part by the parallel CPU architecture, and that the tool reads Synopsys Design Constraint timing files natively and has good correlation to both Synopsys’ Primetime and Cadence’s CeltIC signoff timers (the tool has two modes to run with either signoff timer).
Aprisa’s architects also tailored the tool to support MCMM and OCV analysis. For example, the tool doesn’t require designers use pruning or fan in cones for OCV analysis. It also has features for control of clock reconvergence pessimism removal (CRPR) and transition matching for removing common point pessimism.
In terms of the main tools in Aprisa, ATopTech’s floorplanner reads in DEF files or designers can use design parameters. The tool supports channeled, channel-less, and mixed designs, and can implement rectilinear floorplans.
Next is Aprisa’s joint placement and optimization tool. Thune said Aprisa uses a timing driven analytical placer that is in constant contact with the tool’s built-in timing engine.
“We’re constantly iterating between wire length, congestion and timing optimization to come up with the best results,” he said. The tool also natively supports high fan-out synthesis to ensure it places the optimal amount of buffers.
Aprisa’s clock-tree synthesis tool supports cluster based clock trees or meshes, and gated or board generated clocks. The tool can synchronize generated clock pins, perform automatic clock-gate cloning and de-cloning, and match latency targets specified by users for any pins. “We believe other vendors have very weak clock-tree synthesis tools so we put a lot of time into developing this one,” said Thune.
Thune claimed one big difference between Aprisa and other tools in the industry, is that Aprisa does global routing and track assignment in a single step. The tool has a fast algorithm that allows it to handle 2.8 million instances in roughly 30 minutes. “By doing these together, the global route is very close in parasitic and SI accuracy to the detailed route,” he said. In this step, users will iterate between routing and optimization, performing sizing, buffering and spreading wires guided by SI and timing analysis. Thune noted the tool will also optimize for MCMM.
The last tool in the Aprisa line up is the company’s hybrid detailed router. Thune said the company calls it a “hybrid” because it is primarily a grid-based router, but allows users to route off grid, too. According to the executive, the tool’s architects spent a great deal of time optimizing the performance of the router so that it can route 250,000 instances in 5 minutes running on 8 CPU (Running the tool on 8 CPUs allows the tool to run routing 7 times faster). The tool supports 90-nm/65-nm/45-nm design rules and allows designers to implement custom rules for wide width spacing, shielding and via doubling. Like the other tools it is closely linked with the global router, SI and timing engines and supports MCMM. “We’re doing this all in route versus doing it as a post processing step,” said Thune.
ATopTech’s Aprisa starts at $750,000 for a one year subscription. The company is headquartered in Santa Clara, Calif., and currently has 40 employees. The company has raised $14 million in two rounds of venture capital from Founders, Acorn Campus, H&Q, and Dragon Fund. Thune would not speculate on the company’s future, but said it is following the lead of successful EDA startup Apache Design, meaning the company is focused on putting the technology first and letting the rest of the cards fall where they may.