-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Adding LRES table for GF180MCU DRC #65
Conversation
@proppy Looking forward to getting your feedback on all the PRs. |
@proppy ? |
@atorkmabrains can you review it first? |
@proppy I have already reviewed and approved that code before. My concerns are different than yours. I always focus on 2 things:
All the code that you have here is already reviewed and approved multiple weeks before. |
@atorkmabrains are you able to mark the PR as approved here? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @FaragElsayed2
@proppy Done |
# limitations under the License. | ||
################################################################################################ | ||
|
||
if FEOL |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#58 but not blocking
|
||
if FEOL | ||
#================================================ | ||
#----------------N+ POLY RESISTOR---------------- |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#57 but not blocking
|
||
if FEOL | ||
#================================================ | ||
#----------------N+ POLY RESISTOR---------------- |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#57 but not blocking
logger.info('Executing rule LRES.1') | ||
lres1_l1 = lres_poly.width(0.8.um, euclidian) | ||
lres1_l1.output('LRES.1', 'LRES.1 : Minimum width of Poly2 resistor. : 0.8µm') | ||
lres1_l1.forget |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#53 but not blocking
logger.info('Executing rule LRES.1') | ||
lres1_l1 = lres_poly.width(0.8.um, euclidian) | ||
lres1_l1.output('LRES.1', 'LRES.1 : Minimum width of Poly2 resistor. : 0.8µm') | ||
lres1_l1.forget |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#53 but not blocking
logger.info('Executing rule LRES.1') | ||
lres1_l1 = lres_poly.width(0.8.um, euclidian) | ||
lres1_l1.output('LRES.1', 'LRES.1 : Minimum width of Poly2 resistor. : 0.8µm') | ||
lres1_l1.forget |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#53 but not blocking
## and both side (X and Y) are greater than 80um. | ||
## then the minimum spacing to adjacent RES_MK layer. is 20µm | ||
logger.info('Executing rule LRES.9b') | ||
lres9b = res_mk.with_area(15_000.001.um, nil).edges.with_length(80.001.um, nil) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why do we have .001
here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As the rule wording explains, greater than 15000 not greater than or equal.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what about using 15_000.um + 1.dbu
instead? that seems less arbitrary than .001
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
filed #67 to discuss this further
|
||
# Rule LRES.3: Minimum space from Poly2 resistor to COMP. | ||
logger.info('Executing rule LRES.3') | ||
lres3_l1 = lres_poly.separation(comp, 0.6.um, euclidian).polygons(0.001.um).or(comp.not_outside(lres_poly)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why do we have .001
here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All polygons(0.001.um)
are for visibility and being able to join
the results. But we can't remove that as we combine the layers down the line as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can you clarify what "All polygons(0.001.um) are for visibility" means? (or even better add a comment in the rule that explain that)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When run any kind of spacing check, it generates edges rather than polygons. We convert them to polygons with with 0.001.um
. This is what this does.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
and what is the reason we don't keep them as edges? is to be able to do or()
on them or to be able to call output()
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@proppy exactly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
would https://www.klayout.de/doc/code/class_EdgeProcessor.html#method43 also work here? what would be the trade off of using one versus the other?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We haven't used that method. Also, we don't know if it's exposed for usage in DRC or not. Keep in mind that some of those might not be exposed to be used in DRC. polygons
has been tested significantly. It's fast and tested.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@proppy I don't mind that you could test out the function that you have highlighted above. If it's faster or better, happy to change. But if there is no impact, I recommend leaving polygons as is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
filed #67 to discuss this further
|
||
# Rule LRES.5: Minimum Nplus implant overlap of Poly2 resistor. is 0.3µm | ||
logger.info('Executing rule LRES.5') | ||
lres5_l1 = lres_poly.enclosed(nplus, 0.3.um, euclidian).polygons(0.001.um) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why do we have .001
here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Same
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
filed #66 to discuss this further
# Rule LRES.7: Space from salicide block to contact on Poly2 resistor. | ||
logger.info('Executing rule LRES.7') | ||
cont_lres7 = contact.and(lres_poly) | ||
lres7_l1 = cont_lres7.separation(sab, 0.22.um).polygons(0.001.um) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why do we have .001
here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
filed #66 to discuss this further
lres7_l2.forget | ||
cont_lres7.forget | ||
|
||
# Rule LRES.8 is not a DRC check |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#55 but not blocking
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
just some nits and questions but nothing blocking per se, I'll leave it up to you if you want to address those in this PR or file separate issues to track them.
@proppy Are you using some form of automation to send those comments? I believe it seems that you are doing so. If yes, could you please enlighten me how you do that? Also, are you doing some form of code scanners? |
feaa04a
to
668b144
Compare
No, just way ETOOMANY many tabs open :)
My eyes and grep? |
Adding LRES table for GF180MCU DRC
Fixes #43