Placement and routing for non-rectangular embedded programmable logic cores in SoC design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As SoC design enters into mainstream usage, the ability to make post-fabrication changes will become more and more attractive. This ability can be realized using programmable logic cores. These cores are like any other IP in the SoC design methodology, except that their function can be changed after fabrication. In many cases, non-rectangular programmable logic cores are required, either to better mesh with the other IP cores, or because of I/O constraints. In order to use programmable logic cores, placement and routing algorithms are required to implement user circuits on the core. Existing placement and routing algorithms that target programmable logic were optimized for stand-alone FPGAs which are invariably square or rectangular. We show that these algorithms do not work well when targetting non-rectangular programmable logic cores, and we present enhancements to existing placement and routing algorithms that allow the algorithms to better target these cores. It is shown that the new algorithms lead to a 12% critical path improvement for "U"-shaped cores, and a 4% improvement for "O"-shaped cores. The density and speed penalty for using these non-rectangular cores is significant, compared to square cores, however, we show that the penalty would be significantly larger if the original algorithms were used.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".