Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sorry, I already fixed my branch but wanted to wait for the CI results.
I moved this change into a dedicated commit. This file is actually not used and sg13g2_io.cdl is used.
dnltz
force-pushed
the
WIP/dnltz/ihp-sg13cmos5l
branch
from
779ce87 to
67c44e4
Compare
|
@maliberty one nandgate45 test failed. Can you restart this test? Can you please also enable the ihp-sg13cmos5l runs after this PR got merged? |
dnltz
force-pushed
the
WIP/dnltz/ihp-sg13cmos5l
branch
from
67c44e4 to
5b485cc
Compare
|
Also fixed |
|
Probably the failure just needs a merge of master to resolve as pr-merge is already passing. |
|
Are the standard cells the same (ie could we just link the lef & lib & cdl)? |
dnltz
force-pushed
the
WIP/dnltz/ihp-sg13cmos5l
branch
from
5b485cc to
3f78fad
Compare
Add IHP's SG13CMOS5L PDK. This technology is almost identical to SG13G2, but is missing the HBTs and has only 5 metal layers. It's missing Metal5 and TopMetal2 for cheaper and faster production runs. Signed-off-by: Daniel Schultz <dnltz@aesc-silicon.de>
sg13g2_iocell.cdl is not used anymore and sg13g2_io.cdl is used instead. Remove this old .cdl file. Signed-off-by: Daniel Schultz <dnltz@aesc-silicon.de>
Add all ihp-sg13g2 examples for the CMOS5L PDK and modify all required parts. Signed-off-by: Daniel Schultz <dnltz@aesc-silicon.de>
dnltz
force-pushed
the
WIP/dnltz/ihp-sg13cmos5l
branch
from
3f78fad to
72cdf2b
Compare
no, but the sram macros are the same and I replaced them with links to the same files in the ihp-sg13g2. Ideally we can move all SRAM macros into a common |
That did work, thanks! |
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
| cut_rows | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does this process not need tapcells?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, they don't have one. Same for the SG13G2 process.
| @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ | |||
| # IHP SG13CMOS5L official port for OpenROAD-flow-scripts | |||
|
|
|||
| to be documented | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about a link to the upstream at least?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mind if I update the README for both IHP processes afterwards? SG13G2 is also TBD...
I think there are a couple more places where ORFS could mention support for IHP.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's fine so long as you'll follow up on it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's on my list together with the DRT-0349 warning. Currently working on tape-outs, but I have more time in April.
| @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | |||
| make_tracks Metal1 -x_offset 0.0 -x_pitch 0.48 -y_offset 0.0 -y_pitch 0.42 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same concern as your other PR - this doesn't match the tech LEF
2 participants
This technology is almost identical to SG13G2, but is missing
the HBTs and has only 5 metal layers.
It's missing Metal5 and TopMetal2 for cheaper and faster
production runs.