* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Designreview2
Survey
Document related concepts
Resistive opto-isolator wikipedia , lookup
Ground (electricity) wikipedia , lookup
Switched-mode power supply wikipedia , lookup
Mercury-arc valve wikipedia , lookup
Stray voltage wikipedia , lookup
Alternating current wikipedia , lookup
Current source wikipedia , lookup
Opto-isolator wikipedia , lookup
Buck converter wikipedia , lookup
Thermal runaway wikipedia , lookup
Power MOSFET wikipedia , lookup
Two-port network wikipedia , lookup
Rectiverter wikipedia , lookup
Integrated circuit wikipedia , lookup
Current mirror wikipedia , lookup
Residual-current device wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Design Review 2 Karen Joseph Mehdi Kabir Ashley Brinker ECE 6332: VLSI Professor Calhoun 2 Contents I. Input Vector Control 3 II. MTCMOS Analysis 6 III. Dual-Vt Analysis 13 IV. Paper Reviews 22 V. Reflection and future work 23 3 I. Input Vector Control Figure 1: Simulation of gate and subthreshold leakage currents in 3-input NAND gate (130nm CMOS) with vector input of <000>. The top two graphs show the subthreshold leakage in the NMOS transistors. The bottom three graphs show the gate leakage current through the PMOS transistors. 4 Figure 2: The total leakage current as a function of the input vectors in 3-input NAND gate (in 130nm CMOS). Figure 3: The total leakage current as a function of input vectors in 2-input XOR gate (in 130nm CM0S). 5 Figure 4: Schematic of 3-input NAND gate (actual circuit was built with a netlist). Figure 5: Schematic of 2-input XOR gate (actual circuit was built with a netlist). 6 II. MTCMOS Analysis In this section, we look at the following modified circuit: For comparison purposes, the input is forced to 111 and sleep is on for leakage current calculation. Below are the graphs generated from the simulation data across different size technologies. As expected, MTCMOS reduces leakage current. The MTCMOS places a sleep PMOS transistor and a sleep NMOS with a high Vt than the other transistors. When the circuit is idle (sleep=1), the circuit is cut off from VDD and ground and the high Vt of the sleep transistors reduces leakage current. The Vt of the other transistors are kept low, thus ensuring a reasonable delay when active (sleep=0). As Vt of the sleep transistors increase, as expected by the leakage current equation, the leakage current will reduce. However, increasing Vt has its effect on delay. The following graphs show the change in current as the Vth of the sleep transistors change from 0.4 to 0.8. As Vth increases, the current decreases. Also, the current decreases across technologies. Figure A,below, shows the subthreshold current as Vth increases. 7 8 Figure B, below, shows the gate leakage current as Vth increases. 9 Figure C, below, shows the total leakage current (subthreshold current + gate current) as Vth increases. 10 The following graphs show the subthreshold leakage reduction (Subthreshold current in a regular nand gate – subthreshold current using MTCMOS) across different size technologies. As the size of the transistor decreases, the reduction current also decreases. 11 The following graphs, below, show the gate leakage reduction (gate leakage current in a regular nand gate – gate leakage current using MTCMOS) across different size technologies. 12 13 III. Dual VT Analysis The graph windows below are plots of the leakage current through a 3-input NAND gate using dual-Vt technology for an input of 000. The outputs were obtained using a variety of Vt values. These plots were also taken using predictive model technology ranging from 32nm to 130nm. In each graph window, the first plot is the leakage at the drain of first NMOS transistor (N0), and the following 3 plots are the gate leakage of the PMOS transistors (P0, P1, P2). The table below shows the approximate results. Technology Vt 32nm 45nm 65nm 90nm 130nm 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 N0 leakage 9.07 nA 1.292 nA 412.88 pA 325 pA 318 pA 318 pA 5.36 nA 793.65 pA 333.96 pA 295 pA 290 pA 290 pA 3.49 nA 550.6 pA 295 pA 276.3 pA 275 pA 274.75 pA 2.555 nA 297.56 pA 126.47 pA 115 pA 115 pA 114.5 pA 2.12 nA 187.15 pA 57.49 pA 50 pA 49 pA 49.5 pA P0 leakage -7.45 pA -7.275 pA -7.239 pA -7.233 pA -7.25 pA -7.25 pA -5.7 pA -5.75 pA -5.55 pA -5.55 pA -5.55 pA -5.55 pA -4.47 pA -4.385 pA -4.371 pA -4.369 pA -4.369 pA -4.369 pA -1.3 pA -1.265 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -383 fA -378.5 fA -377.8 fA -377.7 fA -377.7 fA -377.7 fA P1 leakage -7.45 pA -7.275 pA -7.239 pA -7.233 pA -7.25 pA -7.25 pA -5.7 pA -5.75 pA -5.55 pA -5.548 pA -5.55 pA -5.55 pA -4.47 pA -4.385 pA -4.371 pA -4.369 pA -4.369 pA -4.369 pA -1.3 pA -1.265 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -383 fA -378.5 fA -377.8 fA -377.7 fA -377.7 fA -377.7 fA P2 leakage -7.45 pA -7.275 pA -7.239 pA -7.233 pA -7,25 pA -7.25 pA -5.7 pA -5.75 pA -5.55 pA -5.548 pA -5.55 pA -5.55 pA -4.47 pA -4.385 pA -4.371 pA -4.369 pA -4.369 pA -4.369 pA -1.3 pA -1.265 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -1.26 pA -383 fA -378.5 fA -377.8 fA -377.7 fA -377.7 fA -377.7 fA This table shows that as the predictive model increases the leakage in the NMOS transistors and PMOS transistors decreases. It also shows that as the value of Vt increases the leakage decreases also. Depending on the predictive model, once the Vt value gets to a certain point the decrease in leakage tends to taper off and settle on that value as Vt increases. 14 Below are the simulation outputs for 45nm Technology across Vt values from .3 to .8. The same was repeated (graphs not included in this report but can be found on the wiki page) for 32nm, 65nm, 90nm, and 130nm Technologies. 45nm Technology Vtn = 0.3 Vtp = -0.3 15 45nm Technology Vtn = 0.4 Vtp = -0.4 16 45nm Technology Vtn = 0.5 Vtp = -0.5 17 45nm Technology Vtn = 0.6 Vtp = -0.6 18 45nm Technology Vtn =0 .7 Vtp = -0.7 19 45nm Technology Vtn = 0.8 Vtp = -0.8 20 The following graph windows show the delay in transitioning from 000 111 for each predictive model technology at a Vt of 0.4. The first 3 plots of the window show the transition of the inputs (A, B, C) from 0 1. The last plot show when the output (Y) transitions. Comparing when Y transitions compared to when the inputs transition gives the delay of the system. The table below shows the results. Input Output Transistion Transistion Technology Complete Complete Delay 32 nm 2.01 2.05 0.04 45 nm 2.01 2.0675 0.0575 65 nm 2.01 2.075 0.065 95 nm 2.01 2.1 0.09 130 nm 2.01 2.125 0.115 This table shows that as the predictive model technology increases the delay of the transition also increases. 130nm Technology Delay from 000 111 21 32nm Technology Delay from 000 111 Note : The graphs for 45nm, 65nm, and 90nm delay of 000 111 can be found on the wiki. 22 IV. Review papers Rao, R., Burns,J., Brown, R. (2004). Analysis and Optimization of Enhanced MTCMOS Scheme. Proceeding of the 17th International Conference on VLSI Design. One of the methods to reduce leakage current is to stack turned-off CMOS in series. One such stacking scheme is using MTCMOS which uses low-Vth transistors for fast logic operations and high-Vth transistors headers and footers to reduce subthreshold leakage current while the circuit is idle. While the MTCMOS scheme is effective in reducing subthreshold leakage, the authors show that a forced stacking scheme always leads to a greater gate leakage current if the circuit delay is kept constant. The paper continues in quantifying both gate leakage and subthreshold leakage in terms of the activity factor of the circuit. By doing so, the authors showed that for a given activity factor, the gate leakage dominates subthreshold leakage. Therefore, to reduce total leakage current, it’s more important to optimize gate leakage current. Since one of the factors controlling gate leakage is the width of the transistors, the total leakage of a circuit can be reduced by appropriately sizing the header/footer MTCMOS transistors compared to the rest of transistors in the stack. The authors concluded the paper with a formula which gives the optimal sizing ratio for an arbitrary circuit with a given activity factor. Note: Another paper review is embedded within the next section. 23 V. Reflection and future work Currently, we have examined three separate methods to reduce total leakage in a circuit—input vector control, MTCMOS and variable threshold CMOS design. The input vector control method was motivated by the fact that in stacked circuits gate leakage has a much greater contribution to the overall leakage than subthreshold leakage. We were able to show that by controlling the inputs to simple circuits like a 3-input NAND gate or 2-input XOR gate, we can significantly reduce the overall leakage through those circuits. Next, we looked at the effects of MTCMOS on total leakage on a simple 3-input NAND gate. With the use of MTCMOS we were able to reduce not only subthreshold current but also gate leakage current when used in conjunction with input vector control. We also found that using both header and footer MTCMOS provided better leakage control than using a header or footer only. Finally, in the variable threshold CMOS design, we have looked at the effect of changing the threshold voltage on total leakage and switching delay of the circuit. This was done by modifying the threshold voltage for all the transistors in a 3-input NAND. We found that by lowering the threshold voltage, we were able to improve the switching delay at the cost of higher total leakage current. Some of the challenges we faced in our project was learning and using Ocean script. We learned how to calculate leakage current and verified it with several circuits before using that technique on the analysis shown above. We were also able to familiarize ourselves with loops in the ocean script to sweep necessary variables. For the MTCMOS design, we changed the .scs files for the different size technologies to include Vt as a variable, which was then sweeped in ocean to consider the current variations due to different Vt. For the next step, we plan to use a more complex circuit. One of the main things we need to figure out is how to determine whether a transistor is on or off and then calculate its leakage or subthreshold current. We figured out a simple (but tedious in terms of coding) to go through every transistor in the circuit. We checked this with the TA in office hours and learned that this was one of the best methods possible. Then next step in our project is to take our results for leakage reduction for simple gates and apply it to a larger, more complicated circuit—a 16-bit accumulator. The accumulator bit-slice will be composed of a ripple-carry full adder connected to a register. From our results, we were able to derive the best case input vectors for components of the full adder. Using this knowledge, we can apply some type of heuristic [1] to estimate the best the case input vector to reduce the overall gate leakage in the device. We plan to check the estimated best case scenario against a sample of random input vectors to check the correctness of the input vector. In addition, we are going use MTCMOS design within the internal nodes of the circuit to give us more input vectors for us to further reduce the leakage current. While figuring out the optimal case for MTCMOS replacement is beyond the scope of this project, we can use the fast replacement algorithm in [2] to give us a good idea which gate replacements will be the most beneficial. Finally, since we’ve tabulated the delays associated with increasing or decreasing the threshold voltage, we plan on using low-Vth transistors on critical paths for better performance, while using larger Vth on non-critical paths for lower leakage. Since our proposal, we’ve had to make some changes to our timeline. We had already planned to have started optimizing the 16-bit adder by this time. However, after researching the optimization methods, we decided it would be better if we gathered information and analyzed the simpler sub-circuits within the adder. Using the data we gathered, we can employ the algorithms outlined above to greatly speed up our search for the optimal scenario. In terms of the work breakdown, we have been able to maintain the plan that was outlined in our proposal. [1] A. Abdollahi et al (February 2004). Leakage Current Reduction in CMOS VLSI Circuits by Input Vector Control. IEEE Trans. VLSI Systems 2004, 12(2). [2] Yuan, L., Qu, G. (February 2006). A Combined Gate Replacement and Input Vector Control Approach for Leakage Current Reduction. IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, 14(2).