1 / 28

Delay/Phase Regeneration Circuits

Delay/Phase Regeneration Circuits. Crescenzo D’Alessandro, Andrey Mokhov, Alex Bystrov, Alex Yakovlev Microelectronics Systems Design Group School of EECE Newcastle University, UK. Outline. Introduction Background on Phase-encoding Dual-rail/multiple-rail phase encoding

titania
Download Presentation

Delay/Phase Regeneration Circuits

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Delay/Phase Regeneration Circuits Crescenzo D’Alessandro, Andrey Mokhov, Alex Bystrov, Alex Yakovlev Microelectronics Systems Design Group School of EECE Newcastle University, UK

  2. Outline • Introduction • Background on Phase-encoding • Dual-rail/multiple-rail phase encoding • Motivation for the present work • Taxonomy • Latch-based designs • MUTEX-based designs • Design types • Conclusions

  3. t_1 before t_0 t_0 before t_1 ref t_1 t_0 sp0 sp0 sp1 sp0 sp1 data 0 0 1 0 Phase EncodingDual-Rail • Main idea: encode data on the phase relationship between two identical out-of-phase signals • Resistant to transient faults • Similarity with dual-rail dual-spacer protocol

  4. Multiple Rail • No group of wires has the same delay • All wires toggle when an item of data is sent

  5. Phase Corruption • Phase corruption is due to jitter (introduced by the gates), physical wire fabric and transistor mismatches • Mismatch in process variations cause a systematic delay offset to appear between the two lines, which could cause errors in decoding • Additionally, cross-talk causes symbol-dependent phase corruption • As the wires are always “allies” in terms of cross-talk, the longer the wire, the more corrupted the phase relationship between the wires • What is then the optimal length of wire which “guarantees” that the phase relationship is maintained?

  6. Phase Corruption • Example of phase corruption • No change in sequence • Change in absolute value of phase

  7. Taxonomy • Different design styles can be identified • We focus in this presentation on digital implementations • Latch-based designs • A latch is used on each wire • Gate-level implementation • Transistor-level implementation • MUTEX-based designs • A single MUTEX is used to arbitrate between the two edges • “Early-propagating” • “Merging”

  8. Parameters • Maximum input time separation affected δmax • Events whose time separation is > δmax retain their original separation • Circuit latency λ • Time between the first event occurring and the corresponding output being generated • Response time ζ • Time between the two events below which the time separation cannot be regenerated • Capture range κ= δmax – ζ • Using the convention sometimes used in PLLs to give a value for the range • Linearity

  9. Graphs δmax ζ Linearity: how flat this part is λ κ

  10. Passive Solution • “Textbook” solution • Different response for rising/falling – can be matched using balanced drivers • Not very linear • Capacitor size a problem – also introduces latency

  11. Latch-basedGate level/1

  12. Latch-basedGate level/1 • Latches are transparent at startup • They are closed after one edge arrives at the output • They are then reopened after the pulse is finished • 6 FO4 capture range, stops working around 5 FO4 input delta • Difference in rising and falling behaviour

  13. Latch-basedGate level/2 • Similar to previous design • Two pulse generators – faster • Only blocks one output and not both • Only one output used – less difference between rising and falling edges

  14. Latch-basedTransistor level

  15. Latch-basedTransistor level • Better latency and response • Capture range can be increased increasing tau • Good linearity

  16. MUTEX-based

  17. MUTEX-based • Higher latency (complex gates) • Good response and capture range • Poor linearity • Early-propagating

  18. MUTEX-based • “Infinite” capture range – lower-bounded • Flat response • Very high latency – dependent on input time separation • NOR-MUTEX is slow

  19. STG for Repeater • STG for a repeater • Use timing assumptions: • i1- -> p1 -> g11-, g12- • g11- -> i1+ • … and mirror ones • This STG can be synthesised using PETRIFY • Synthesised version in next slide…

  20. MUTEX-basedw/PETRIFY • Very good linearity and capture range • High latency independent on input until 0.5 FO4 • Generated using PETRIFY (STG in previous slide)

  21. TSE • Transition Sequence Encoder • This circuit generates a number of requests based on an input matrix • The acknowledgments can be either “proper” or a delayed version of the output signals • Can be used as a phase-encoder

  22. MUTEX-TSE • This solution is similar to the MUTEX-based one, only using the TSE as a sender • λ < 2 FO4 • Increasing output time separation dependent on the input (output δ > 8FO4)

  23. TSE – Transistor-level • Like above, only rising and falling edge • Transistor-level implementation of the TSE • Results similar to the previous case • Note the similarity with the transistor-level latch-based design

  24. Multiple-rail • Multiple-rail phase-encoding requires similar designs to regenerate the phase relationship • The design on the right is a simple expansion of the previous latch-based design • Very slow response • Only useful for large δ • Acceptable latency

  25. Multiple-rail “merge” • Better design: use a TSE • Shown: 3-wires regeneration – left, rising edge only, right; rising and falling edges • Better response, but λ depends on the input time separation (needs to wait for all inputs to be present)

  26. Performance comparison • Dual-rail implementations • Area in transistor count • κ and λ in FO4 • Area and energy for “Latch-based transistor level” design is for no keeper/keeper • “Charge compensation”: area calculated estimating the size of the capacitors • Avg. for rise/fall

  27. Conclusions • Some phase-regeneration circuits have been presented • More work to do: • Metastability behaviour, in particular for keeper structures • Behaviour in case of faults • Characterisation with different input signal slopes

  28. Contact details Crescenzo S. D’Alessandro Microelectronics Systems Design Group School of Electrical, Electronics and Computer Engineering Merz Court Newcastle University, UK Crescenzo.D’Alessandro@ncl.ac.uk http://async.org.uk

More Related