Skip to content
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

Openframe DEF File PR boundary #500

Closed
marwaneltoukhy opened this issue Sep 22, 2023 · 4 comments · Fixed by #503
Closed

Openframe DEF File PR boundary #500

marwaneltoukhy opened this issue Sep 22, 2023 · 4 comments · Fixed by #503

Comments

@marwaneltoukhy
Copy link
Member

The openframe example def file has the PR boundary overlapping the PR boundary of the chip_io, which makes the router rout over pins inside the chip_io boundary.

@RTimothyEdwards
Copy link
Contributor

@marwaneltoukhy : Are you sure it's the PR boundary, or is it just that the DEF file did not contain blockages where the non-pin metal shapes are? Can you post a screenshot of where the error is?

@marwaneltoukhy
Copy link
Member Author

marwaneltoukhy commented Sep 24, 2023

From my understanding, OpenLane doesn't take the obstructions into consideration from the template def file, it only uses it to get the pin coordinates. As OpenLane doesn't see the whole chip when hardening the user wrapper, it is legal for it to route anywhere in the PR boundary, which is the source of the problem, because the PR boundaries of the chip_io and the wrapper overlap it routed over the pins.
image

@RTimothyEdwards
Copy link
Contributor

@marwaneltoukhy : Then you need to fix openlane. I'm sure OpenROAD will respect obstructions in the input DEF file.

@RTimothyEdwards
Copy link
Contributor

@marwaneltoukhy : There is another solution I could employ, which would be to create another gpiov2 cell wrapper that would be just for the openframe version and would just remove all the unused pins. Then I could probably keep everything else exactly as it is currently defined and openlane would be fine routing anywhere within the boundary.

@marwaneltoukhy marwaneltoukhy linked a pull request Oct 8, 2023 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants