1.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis1 Synthesis for Pass Transistor Logic Maciej Ciesielski Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA ciesiel@ecs.umass.edu

2.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis2 Overview Introduction –Pass transistor basics –Electrical considerations: margin, delay, power –Pass transistor logic (PTL) Pass transistor logic synthesis –Based on conventional (CMOS) synthesis Logic gates implemented in PTL –BDD-based synthesis BDD mapping onto Y cells [Yano 96] BDD decomposition + mapping onto CMOS and PTL (BDS system, [Yang 99]

3.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis3 Pass Transistor - Basics Works as a switch: on / off Noise margin problem –nMOS: passes clear 0, degrades 1 –pMOS: passes clear 1, degrades 0 V dd 00 V dd -V th - V dd 0V th V dd Need restoring logic (buffers), pass transmission gates

4.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis4 Pass Transistor Electrical Characteristics Delay through a chain of pass transistors: RnRn RnRn RnRn RnRn CgCg CgCg CgCg CgCg del = R n C g + 2 R n C g + … + n R n C g = R n C g (1 + 2 + … n) = R n C g (n + 1) n / 2 Remedy: limit number of pass transistors to 3

5.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis5 Pass Transistor - Applications Specialty, custom circuits –XOR, etc. Arithmetic logic –Custom designed arithmetic circuits –Regularity, low area, low power Control logic ? –No working methodology for logic synthesis, yet

6.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis6 Conventional (CMOS) Logic Synthesis - Review - Targeting only CMOS logic gates –Static: no dynamic logic, no pass transistors Optimization metrics based on literal * count Minimize the number of literals One-to-one correspondence with transistor signals: n literals => 2n CMOS transistors F = (A B C)’ = A’+B’+C’ F B A C * Literal = variable or its complement

7.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis7 Conventional Logic Synthesis - Review Boolean expressions mapped on CMOS standard cells –AND, OR, NAND, NOR, complex gates –Logic functions expressed in terms of those by logic optimization tools (SIS, Synopsys DC, etc.) –No MUXes, no XORs Large standard cell libraries –200-300+ elements (different # of inputs, power capability) –Difficult to maintain, upgrade with technology change Algebraic manipulation of Boolean expressions –Algebraic factorization (simple): ab + ac = a(b + c) –Boolean factorization (better): (a + b)(a + c) = a + bc

8.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis8 PTL-based Logic Synthesis: a Simple-minded Approach Based on mapping AND/OR gates onto PTL cells –use conventional multi-level logic optimization –generate Boolean expressions –map onto AND/OR gates implemented as PTL (MUXes) B = 1: F = A B = 0: F = Z A B F = A B ? F B A F = A B

9.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis9 Example: Conventional CMOS design F = A’B’ + BC’ + A’C C B A NAND F Conventional logic synthesis Results mapped onto CMOS gates [ ( A’(B’ + C) )’ · (B’ + C) ]’ = A’B’ + BC’ + A’C

10.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis10 Example: Conventional design + PTL C B A NAND F F = A’B’ + BC’ + A’C Conventional logic synthesis Gates mapped onto PTL gates [ ( A’(B’ + C) )’ · (B’ + C) ]’ = A’B’ + BC’ + A’C

11.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis11 Comparison: CMOS vs. PTL C B A NAND F F = A’B’ + BC’ + A’C Transistor count: Cell count: Area: Delay: Power: 16 (1) 4 (1) 852  m 2 (1) 652 ps (1) 1.81  W/MHz (1) 30 (1.88) 4 (1) 1158  m 2 (1.36) 877 ps (1.35) 2.17  W/MHz (1.20) C B A F NAND PTL NAND PTL

12.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis12 Conventional design with PTL - Problems - Simple-minded approach –Literal count (good for CMOS), does not work for PTL –Algebraic methods not compatible with MUX-based design Inefficient –Large area, delay, power Need better approach, compatible with MUX concept

13.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis13 PTL-based Logic Synthesis: a MUX-based Approach Approach based on Shannon expansion –Represent Boolean logic as a BDD –Map BDD nodes onto PTL gates MUXes: simple and multiple-input (Y cells) PTL tree BDD Review Binary Decision Diagrams (BDD)

14.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis14 Binary Decision Diagrams (BDD) Convenient data structure for Boolean logic representation and manipulation –Decision graph, derived from Shannon expansion each node represents Shannon expansion along a variable: f = x f x + x’ f x’ –Represent sets of objects (states, product terms, etc.) encoded as Boolean functions –Each path represents an implicant (product term) –Reduced BDD - irredundant –Ordered BDD - canonical Application to logic synthesis and verification –Canonicity property (reduced ordered BDDs)

15.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis15 BDD - Construction Construction of a Reduced Ordered BDD a b c f 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Truth table f = ac + bc 1 edge (f x ) 0 edge (f x’ ) Decision tree 1 0 001010 a b c b ccc f

16.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis16 BDD Construction – cont’d f 10 a b c b c 2. Remove duplicate nodes 10 a b c b ccc f 1. Remove duplicate terminals 10 a b c f = (a+b)c 3. Remove redundant nodes

17.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis17 Application to Verification Equivalence of combinational circuits Canonicity property of BDDs: –if F and G are equivalent, their BDDs are identical (for the same ordering of variables ) 10 a b c G = ac +bc F = a’bc + abc +ab’c 10 a b c 

18.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis18 Application to Verification, cont’d Functional test generation –SAT, Boolean satisfiability analysis –to test for H = 1 (0), find a path in the BDD to terminal 1 (0) –the path, expressed in function variables, gives a satisfying solution (test vector) ab ab’c H 0 1 a b c

19.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis19 Application to Synthesis BDD node = simple multiplexer (MUX) x F x’ FxFx F x FxFx x’ F F = x F x + x’ F x’

20.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis20 Application to Synthesis (simple-minded approach) Represent each BDD node as a MUX, implemented in PTL 10 a b c F = ac +bc c bc b a 0 c 1 F = ac +bc

21.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis21 PTL-based Logic Synthesis - Problems - Ineffective for larger circuits –too large, too slow, too many MUXes –pass transistor chains are too long –need separating buffers –need methodology for synthesizing circuits from their BDDs

22.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis22 Logic Synthesis based on Pass Transistor Logic Introduce a few PTL cells –easy to maintain cell library A B C C’ Y1 cell D’ E’ A B E D C Y2 cell A B CC’ Y3 cell D D’ E F G G’

23.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis23 Basic CMOS and PTL cells F = (A B C)’ = A’+B’+C’ F NAND B A C CMOS cell PTL cell B A E F Y2 D C F’ = E(A D + B D’) + E’ C

24.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis24 Characteristics - PTL vs. CMOS cell F = (A B C)’ = A’+B’+C’ Transistor count: Cell count: Area: Delay: Power: 6 (1) 1 (1) 329  m 2 (1) 295 ps (1) 0.91  W/MHz (1) 13 (2.17) 3(3) 579  m 2 (1.75) 465 ps (1.58) 0.96  W/MHz (1.05) B A C F PTL F CMOS B A C

25.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis25 PTL-based Logic Synthesis: a multi-input MUX-based Approach Based on multi-input MUXes (Y cells) C B A Y2 cell F = (ACB + AB’)’ = A’B’ + BC’ + A’C

26.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis26 MUX-based Approach Compare to conventional approach with PTL gates (numbers relative to CMOS) C B A NAND C B A Y2cell Transistor count: Cell count: Area: Delay: Power: 30 (1.88) 4 (1) 1158  m 2 (1.36) 877 ps (1.35) 2.17  W/MHz (1.20) 13(0.81) 3(0.75) 579  m 2 (0.68) 465 ps (0.71) 0.96  W/MHz (0.53)

27.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis27 PTL Synthesis Flow [Yano 96] Express Boolean logic as shared, multi-output BDD Partition BDD into smaller sub-trees, isomorphic with Y cells Map each sub-tree onto a Y cell Insert buffers at the Y-cell boundaries this keeps pass transistor chains limited to 2 (Y tree height) Fix circuit polarity by propagating inverters Adjust inverter power (P2,4,etc) according to cell load

28.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis28 Y-cell based PTL Synthesis - Example Create shared BDD f = w + x + (y z + y’z’) 0 w x y 1 z f z g w Y1 Y2 Partition BDD into sub-trees and map each sub-trees to a Y cell Note: Cell type depends on the logic implemented, not just on the number of variables/inputs g = w (y z + y’z’)

29.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis29 Example: PTL mapping f y z w w x g f = w + x + (y z + y’ z’) g = w (y z + y’ z’) Y1 Y2 Y1 0 w x y 1 z f z g w g = [w’ + w (y z + y’ z’)’]’ = w (y z + y’ z’) f = [w’ x’ (y z + y’ z’)’] ’ = w + x + (y z + y’ z’)

30.  2000 M. CiesielskiPTL Synthesis30 PTL Synthesis - Results Impressive results for control logic and arithmetic circuits –improvement in area, delay and power ! –need BDD synthesis & partitioning methodology –use CMOS gates as natural buffers? New research (BDS) – mixing CMOS with PTL