Loading in 2 Seconds...

High-Speed Circuit-Tuning Techniques Based on Lagrangian Relaxation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

126 Views

Download Presentation
##### High-Speed Circuit-Tuning Techniques Based on Lagrangian Relaxation

**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. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

**High-Speed Circuit-Tuning Techniques Based on Lagrangian**Relaxation Charlie Chung-Ping Chen ICCAD 99’ Embedded Tutorial Session 12A chen@engr.wisc.edu (608)2651145**People Involved**• Joint work Charlie Chen, University of Wisconsin at Madison Chris Chu, Iowa State University D. F. Wong, University of Texas at Austin • Publication “Fast and Exact Simultaneous Gate and Wire Sizing by Lagrangian Relaxation”, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design, July 1999**Acknowledgement**• Strategic CAD Labs, Intel Corp. Steve Burns, Prashant Sawkar, N. Sherwani, and Noel Menezes • IBM T. J. Watson Center Chandu Visweswariah • C. Kime, L. He (UWisc-Madison)**Outline**• Motivation • Overview of Circuit Tuning Techniques • Lagrangian Relaxation Based Circuit Tuning**Motivation**• Double the work load and design complexity every 18 months**Motivation**• Trends • Increased custom design • Aggressive tuning for performance improvement • Shorter time to market • Interconnect effects severe • Signal integrity issues emerging • Circuit Tuning • Can significantly improve circuit performance and signal integrity without major modification**Manual Sizing**1000+ iterations • Pros • Takes advantage of human experience • Reliable • Simultaneously combines with other optimization techniques directly • Cons • Slow, tedious, limited, and error-prone procedure • Rely too much on experience, requires solid training • Optimality not guaranteed (don’t know when to stop) Change Simulate Satisfy?**Automatic Circuit Tuning**• Pros • Fast • Achieves the best performance with interconnect considerations • Explores alternatives (power/delay/noise tradeoff) • Boosts productivity • Optimality guaranty (for convex problems) • Insures timing and reliability • Cons • Complicated tool development and support ($$) • Tool testing, integration, and training**Good Tuning Algorithm**• Fast • Optimality guaranteed (for convex problem) • Versatile • Easy to use • Solution quality index (error bound to the optimal solution) • Simple (Easy to develop and maintain)**Static vs. Dynamic Sizing**• Static Sizing • Stage Based • Nature circuit decomposition, large scale tuning capability • Very reasonable accuracy (when using good model) • No need for sensitization vectors • Solves for all critical paths in a polynomial formulation • False paths; Potentially inaccurate modeling of slopes of input excitation • Dynamic Sizing • Simulation based • More accurate • No false path problems • Need good input vectors; good for circuits for which critical paths are known and limited • Takes care of a few scenario only • Relatively slower**A Simple Sizing Problem**• Minimize the maximum delay Dmax by changing w1,…,wn w7 w9 w4 w1 D1<Dmax a w5 w10 D2<Dmax b w2 w6 w11 w3 w8**Existing Sizing Works**• Algorithm: fast, non-optimal for general problem formulation • TILOS (J. Fishburn, A. Dunlop, ICCAD 85’) • Weight Delay Optimization (J. Cong et al., ICCAD 95’) • Mathematical Programming: slower, optimal • Geometrical Programming (TILOS) • Augmented Lagrangian (D. P. Marple et al., 86’) • Sequential Linear Programming (S. Sapatnekar et al.) • Interior Point Method (S. Sapatnekar et al., TCAD 93’) • Sequential Quadratic Programming (N. Menezes et al., DAC 95’) • Augmented Lagrangian + Adjoin Sensitivity (C. Visweswariah et al., ICCAD 96’, ICCAD97’) • Is there any method that is fast and optimal?**Converge?**Augmented Lagrangian Weighted Delay SQP Fast Optimal TILOS SLP ? Mathematical Programming Algorithm**Heuristic Approach**• TILOS: (J. Fishburn etc ICCAD 85’) • Find all the sensitivities associated with each gate • Up-Size one gate only with the maximum sensitivity • To minimize the object function Minimize Dmax w2 w1 w3 a w4 D1<Dmax w5 w6 D2<Dmax b w11 w9 w7 w8 w10**Weighted Delay Optimization**• J. Cong ICCAD 95’ • Size one wire at a time in DFS order • To minimize the weighted delay • best weight? Minimize l1D1 +l2D2 Drivers Loads w1 w2 w3 l1D1 l2D2 w5 w4**Mathematical Programming**• Problem Formulation: • Lagrangian: • Optimality (Necessary) Condition: (Kuhn-Tucker Condition)**PSLP v.s. SQP**• Penalty Sequential Linear Programming • Sequential Quadratic Programming**Lagrangian Methods**• Augmented Lagrangian • Lagrangian Relaxation**Lagrangian Relaxation Theory**• LRS (Lagrangian Relaxation Subproblem) • There exist Lagrangian multipliers will lead LRS to find the optimal solution for convex programming problem • The optimal solution for any LRS is a lower bound of the original problem for any type of problem**Lagrangian Relaxation**Lagrangian Relaxation Weighted Delay!**Lagrangian Relaxation**Augmented Lagrangian Weighted Delay SQP TILOS SLP Lagrangian Relaxation Sink Weights=Multipliers Mathematical Programming Algorithm**Lagrangian Relaxation Framework**Update Multipliers Weighted Delay Optimization Converge?**Lagrangian Relaxation Framework**Dmax l1 l2 D1 D2 Dmax l1 l2 D1 D2 More Critical -> More Resource -> More Weight D1 D2**Weighted Minimization**• Traverse the circuit in topological order • Resize each component to minimize Lagrangian during visit Minimize l1D1 +l2D2 w1 a D1 D2 b w2 w3**Multipliers Adjustmenta subgradient approach**• Subgradient: An extension definition of gradient for non-smooth function • Experience: Simple heuristic implementation can achieve very good convergence rate • Reference: Non-smooth function optimization: N. Z. Shor**Path Delay Formulation**d1 d2 Aa D1 Ab d3 D2 Ac • Exponential growing • More accurate • Can exclude false paths**Stage Delay Formulation**d1 d2 Ae Aa D1 Ab d3 D2 Ac • Polynomial size • Less accurate • Contains false paths**Compatible?**? Path Based Stage Based**Both Multipliers Satisfy KCL(Flow Conservation)**l41 l51 l42 l52 Path Based Stage Based l43 1 l31 1 4 4 3 2 2 3 l32 5 5 l53 l3,in =l3,out l43 +l53=l31 +l32**Mixed Delay Formulation**Stage Based Stage Based Path Based**Compatible?**Lagrangian Relaxation Both Multipliers Satisfy KCL Stage Based Path Based**Hierarchical Objective Function Decomposition**• Divide the Lagrangian into who terms (containing or not containing variable wi ) • Hierarchically update the Lagrangian during resizing**Intermediate Variables Cancellation**Ae Aa D1 Ab D2 Ac lae lae +lbe =le1 +le2 lbe le1 + le2 lc2 lae (Aa+ d1 )+lbe (Ab+ d1)+le1 (d2 - D1 )+ le2 (d3 - D2 )**Decomposition and Pruning**• Flow Decomposition • Prune out all the gates with zero multipliers**Complimentary Condition Implications**• li (Di-Dmax )= 0 • Optimal Solution • Critical Path, weight l i >= 0.0, path delay=Dmax • Non-critical path, weight l i = 0.0, path delay < Dmax**Convergence Sequence**Optimal Solution Max Delay Any Feasible Maximum Delay= Upper Bound Lagrangian=Lower Bound Weighted Delay<=Maximum Delay # Iteration**Conclusion**• Lagrangian Relaxation • General mathematical programming algorithm • Optimality guarantee for convex programming problem • Versatile • No extra complication (no quadratic penalty function) • Lagrangian multiplier provides connections between mathematical programming and algorithmic approaches • Multipliers satisfy KCL (flow conservation) • Hierarchical update objective function provides extreme efficiency • Solution quality guaranteed (by providing lower bound)