Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ant: return CAR and CSR violations to repair_antennas #5242

Merged

Conversation

eder-matheus
Copy link
Collaborator

Fixes The-OpenROAD-Project/OpenROAD-flow-scripts#1981

This is an initial implementation, as mentioned in a comment in the code. Using this naive approach, we can reduce the number of nets with violations from 81 to 55 in ihp-sg13g2/riscv32i.

Signed-off-by: Eder Monteiro <eder.matheus.monteiro@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Eder Monteiro <eder.matheus.monteiro@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Eder Monteiro <eder.matheus.monteiro@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Eder Monteiro <eder.matheus.monteiro@gmail.com>
Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

1 similar comment
Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

Copy link
Member

@maliberty maliberty left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor cleanup before merging

Comment on lines 754 to 761
if (layer->getRoutingLevel() != 0) {
auto psr_violation
= checkPSR(layer, node_info, verbose, report, report_file);
bool csr_violation
= checkCSR(layer, node_info, verbose, report, report_file);
node_has_violation
= node_has_violation || psr_violation.first || csr_violation;
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does check* have a side-effect or should we skip this if node_has_violation was already set by PAR/CAR?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should not skip because a net can have both PAR/CAR and PSR/CSR. Skipping it will give us the wrong number of violations and make the report incorrect.

Comment on lines 749 to 752
bool node_has_violation = false;
auto par_violation = checkPAR(layer, node_info, verbose, report, report_file);
bool car_violation = checkCAR(layer, node_info, verbose, report, report_file);
node_has_violation = par_violation.first || car_violation;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There's no need to define node_has_violation and then set it afterwards, just combine 749 & 752

Signed-off-by: Eder Monteiro <eder.matheus.monteiro@gmail.com>
Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

@eder-matheus eder-matheus merged commit 4f26303 into The-OpenROAD-Project:master Jun 14, 2024
11 checks passed
@eder-matheus eder-matheus deleted the ant_car_violations branch June 14, 2024 00:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Platform SG13G2 misses antenna diode definition in the LEF
2 participants