Create Presentation
Download Presentation

Download Presentation
## Register-Transfer (RT) Synthesis

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

**Register-Transfer (RT) Synthesis**Greg Stitt ECE Department University of Florida**Introduction**• Register-transfer (RT) synthesis • Definition: Synthesis from register transfer level (RTL) descriptions • VHDL, Verilog typically describe circuits as connections of RTL components • What are register-transfer level components? • Muxes, ALUs, registers, multipliers, etc. • One abstraction level above gates • Basically, components you use in most structural descriptions • What are other levels? • Transistor level • Gate level • Register transfer level • High level • System level • Etc.**RT Synthesis**• Main Steps • Lex/Parsing • Analyzes HDL, converts into intermediate representation • Resource Allocation • Maps intermediate representation into RT components • Optimizations • Logic minimization • State minimization • State encoding • Etc. • Technology Mapping • Placement + Routing**Technology Mapping**• Converts circuit from one technology (e.g. gates) onto technology used by physical device (e.g. LUTs, CLBs, etc) CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB**Placement**• Input: Technology-mapped circuit • For simplicity, just consider CLBs • Technology-mapped circuit consists of “virtual” CLBs and “virtual” connections • FPGA fabric consists of physical CLBs • Simplified Placement Definition: • Map “virtual” CLBs onto physical CLBs • I.e. Decide on a location in the FPGA for each virtual CLB Technology Mapped Circuit FPGA Fabric Possible Placement 1 2 3 4 CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB 1 2 3 4 5 CLB 6 CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB 6 5 CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB**Routing**• Input: A set of placed components, and a list of “virtual” connections • Simplified Routing Definition: • Determine how to configure routing resources to implement “virtual” connections 1 2 3 4 CLB 1 2 3 4 Physical CLBs not connected – must configure routing resources to implement these connections: 5 CLB 6 CLB CLB 6 5 CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB**Placement+Routing (PAR)**• Placement and routing highly dependent • Placement affects how well circuit can be routed • Example: Placement 1 Placement 2 6 3 CLB 1 CLB 1 2 3 4 CLB 1 2 3 4 CLB CLB 4 CLB CLB 5 CLB 6 CLB CLB 6 5 2 CLB CLB CLB 5 CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB Clearly, placement 1 is easier to route**Placement+Routing (PAR)**• Goals: • 1) Make sure circuit can be implemented on fabric • Trivial for placement, difficult for routing • Bad placement may make circuit unroutable • 2) Minimize delay of critical path • Critical path is the longest register to register delay • Important - Determines clock speed of circuit • Why is placement and routing important? • Bad PAR = slow circuit • Even worse, BAD PAR = no circuit Placement 2 Placement 1 6 3 CLB 1 CLB 1 2 3 4 CLB CLB CLB 4 CLB CLB 5 CLB 6 CLB CLB 2 CLB CLB CLB 5 CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB Even if routing is possible, placement 2 likely to have longer wires – slower clock**Placement**• Problem: Find a placement for each CLB, such that routing can maximize clock speed • Challenges: • 1) Huge solution space! • Tiny Example: Fabric = 100 physical CLBs, Circuit = 10 “virtual” CLBs • Possibilities = 100! / 90! = 6.2 * 1019 • And, that is for a tiny fabric and tiny circuit!!!!!!!!!!! • Guess what … placement is NP-Complete • 2) How to know how good the routing will be? • One (im)possibility - perform routing for each possible placement • Tiny example, cont. - assume same number of routing possibilities as placement possibilities • 6.2 * 1019 *6.2 * 1019 = A BIG NUMBER! • Routing is also NP-complete • Cleary, placement needs to estimate quality of routing • Estimate known as a cost function**Cost Function Examples**• Example: average wire length • Motivation: short wires faster than long wires • Not perfect - many short wires not on critical path may lead to inaccuracy • i.e. critical path may still be long despite short average wire length • How to determine wire length? • Without routing, don’t know length • Possibilities: • 1) Euclidian distance - measure straight line distance between CLBs • Ignores how wire would be routed (can’t route diagonals) • 2) Manhattan distance - shortest “zig-zag” distance • Includes bends between CLBs Euclidian Distance CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB Manhattan Distance CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB CLB**Placement Techniques**• Placement is an NP-complete optimization problem • Many possible placements, we want the best one • What does this suggest for a solution? • Remember last lecture! • 1) Branch and bound • Likely not feasible • 2) Map to other NP-complete problem - use heuristic for that problem • 3) Use general optimization heuristics • Simulated annealing • Hill climbing • Very common (notice the temperature numbers in Xilinx ISE) • How to use general optimization heuristics? • Cost function represents quality of placement • Neighboring solution – try new location for a “virtual” CLB, swap 2 CLBs, etc.**Placement Techniques**• Also common to map placement to other NP-complete problems • Example: Min-cut problem • Background: Given a graph, a cut is a set of edges that divides the graph into two (or more) groups • Min-cut problem definition: • Find the minimum cut size for a given graph • Similar to graph bipartitioning problem Cutsize = 5 Cutsize = 3**Placement Techniques**• How can graph bipartitioning/min-cut be used for placement? • Graph: Nodes are CLBs, Edges are wires • Partition divides FPGA into sections • Goal: minimize communication between sections • Bipartitioning attempts to reduce routing “congestion” • i.e. Cost function is cut size • We can use common heuristic for graph bipartitioning • Kernighan-Lin (KL) Heuristic**Placement Techniques**• KLFM Heuristic (Kernighan-Lin Fiduccia-Mattheyses) • Basic Idea: • Start with initial partition • Iteratively improves cutsize • Cutsize is number of edges between partitions • Moves one node at a time • Node that gives greatest reduction or least degradation • Lock node after moving • Continue moving nodes until all locked or size constraints are violated • Find best partitioning, unlock all nodes • Repeat until no improvement found**KLFM Algorithm**Initial Partition Maximum Size = 4 Size = 3 Size = 3 Cutsize = 5**KLFM Algorithm**Maximum Size = 4 Size = 4 Size = 2 Cutsize = 3**KLFM Algorithm**Maximum Size = 4 Size = 3 Size = 3 Cutsize = 2**KLFM Algorithm**Maximum Size = 4 Size = 2 Size = 4 Cutsize = 2**KLFM Algorithm**Maximum Size = 4 Size = 3 Size = 3 Cutsize = 4**KLFM Algorithm**Maximum Size = 4 Size = 2 Size = 4 Cutsize = 4**KLFM Algorithm**Maximum Size = 4 Size = 3 Size = 3 Cutsize = 5**KLFM Algorithm**Backtrack to minimum cut size, unlock nodes, and repeat Size = 3 Size = 3 Cutsize = 2**Circuit Partitioning**• How does a partition help us place CLBs? • Apply bipartitioning hierarchically – circuit partitioning • Basic idea • 1) Initially divide FPGA into 2 sections • Execute bipartitioning to determine which section “virtual” CLBs get mapped into • 2) Divide each section into 2 subsections • Execute bipartitioning to determine which subsection “virtual” CLBs get mapped into • 3) Divided each subsection into 2 subsubsections • And so on