Why do we fix load and slew violations?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ukint

Member level 2
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
45
Helped
4
Reputation
8
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
1,597
Hi,
Can someone explain why we have to fix load and slew violations even after the timing is clean?

Thanks,
Vivek
 

Static timing has no clue about things like trace couplings that
could (say) make an inverter reswitch when a slow moving input
is modulated by a sharp coupled transition. Plus timing characterization
is performed across a fixed range of load and input risetime,
and rules "keep you inside the map".

The digital paradigm is one of abstraction and constraint.
You don't get to only believe the abstraction.
 

Thanks for the reply. Can you elaborate more on your reply. I am not able to understand it completely.
So are you suggesting that the STA tool doesnot model the max trans and max cap correctly?
 

It only models what it is given. Whoever did the cell library chose
a range of risetimes and loads to characterize and build the
timing model tables (or functions) from. This is your "known space".
Complementary to this are a set of hard constraints, the "fence" you
can't go outside and believe the STA timing closure.

What STA (static) can't deal with, is dynamic effects such as the
next wire over, which STA treats as a simple shunt capacitance,
switching at exactly the wrong time and advancing a clock
or retarding data or creating a timing hazard / spike where there
would have only been slowness.

If you work with comparators you know about how a slow input
risetime enables output chatter based on small amounts of
input noise. Your "chatter window" is the transform of input
signal slope and input "linear window" (roughly (VOH-VOL)/gain).
 

    ukint

    Points: 2
    Helpful Answer Positive Rating
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…