Optimality and scalability study of existing placement algorithms

Placement is an important step in the overall IC design process in deep submicron technologies, as it defines the on-chip interconnects which have become the bottleneck in determining circuit performance. The rapidly increasing design complexity, combined with the demand for the capability of handling nearly flattened designs for physical hierarchy generation, poses significant challenges to existing placement algorithms. There are very few studies dedicated to understanding the optimality (i.e., the comparison of the solution of an algorithm to the optimal solution) and scalability (i.e., the analysis of the degradation of the performance of an algorithm as the input size of the problem increases) of placement algorithms, due to the limited sizes of existing benchmarks and limited knowledge of optimal solutions. The contribution of this work includes three parts. 1) We implemented an algorithm [Placement Examples with Known Optimal (PEKO) algorithm] for generating synthetic benchmarks that have known optimal wirelengths and can match any given net degree distribution profile. 2) Using benchmarks of 10 k to 2 M placeable modules with known optimal solutions, we studied the optimality and scalability of four state-of-the-art placers, Dragon (Wang et al., 2000), Capo (Caldwell et al., 2000), mPL (Chan et al., 2000), and mPG (Chang et al., 2002) from academia, and a leading edge industrial placer, QPlace (Cadence 1999) from Cadence. For the first time our study reveals the gap between the results produced by these tools versus true optimal solutions. The wirelengths produced by these tools are 1.59 to 2.40 times the optimal in the worst cases, and are 1.43 to 2.12 times the optimal on average. As for scalability, the average solution quality of each tool deteriorates by an additional 9% to 17% when the problem size increases by a factor of ten. These results indicate significant room for improvement in existing placement algorithms. 3) We studied the impact of nonlocal nets on the quality of the placers by extending the PEKO algorithm (PEKU algorithm) to generate synthetic placement benchmarks with a known upper bound of the optimal wirelength. For these benchmarks, the wirelengths produced by these tools are 1.75 to 2.18 times the wirelength upper bound in the worst case, and are 1.62 to 2.07 times the wirelength upper bound on average. Moreover, in our study we found that the effectiveness of the algorithms varies for circuits with different characteristics.

[1]  Kazuo Iwama,et al.  Random Generation of Test Instances for Logic Optimizers , 1994, 31st Design Automation Conference.

[2]  Shashi Shekhar,et al.  Multilevel hypergraph partitioning: applications in VLSI domain , 1999, IEEE Trans. Very Large Scale Integr. Syst..

[3]  Andrew B. Kahng,et al.  Can recursive bisection alone produce routable, placements? , 2000, Proceedings 37th Design Automation Conference.

[4]  Patrick H. Madden Reporting of standard cell placement results , 2002, IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst..

[5]  Jan M. Van Campenhout,et al.  Generating synthetic benchmark circuits for evaluating CAD tools , 2000, IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst..

[6]  Wayne Wei-Ming Dai,et al.  A Method for Generation Random Circuits and Its Application to Routability Measurement , 1996, Fourth International ACM Symposium on Field-Programmable Gate Arrays.

[7]  Frank M. Johannes,et al.  Generic global placement and floorplanning , 1998, Proceedings 1998 Design and Automation Conference. 35th DAC. (Cat. No.98CH36175).

[8]  Roy L. Russo,et al.  On a Pin Versus Block Relationship For Partitions of Logic Graphs , 1971, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[9]  J. P. Grossman,et al.  Characterization and parameterized generation of synthetic combinational benchmark circuits , 1998, IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst..

[10]  Majid Sarrafzadeh,et al.  Dragon2000: standard-cell placement tool for large industry circuits , 2000, IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer Aided Design. ICCAD - 2000. IEEE/ACM Digest of Technical Papers (Cat. No.00CH37140).

[11]  G. Sigl,et al.  GORDIAN: a new global optimization/rectangle dissection method for cell placement , 1988, ICCAD 1988.

[12]  Sung-Woo Hur,et al.  Mongrel: hybrid techniques for standard cell placement , 2000, IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer Aided Design. ICCAD - 2000. IEEE/ACM Digest of Technical Papers (Cat. No.00CH37140).

[13]  Jason Cong,et al.  Physical hierarchy generation with routing congestion control , 2002, ISPD '02.

[14]  Carl Sechen,et al.  Efficient and effective placement for very large circuits , 1995, IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst..

[15]  Konrad Doll,et al.  Analytical placement: a linear or a quadratic objective function? , 1991, 28th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference.

[16]  Jason Cong,et al.  Optimality, scalability and stability study of partitioning and placement algorithms , 2003, ISPD '03.

[17]  Andrew B. Kahng,et al.  Quantified Suboptimality of VLSI Layout Heuristics , 1995, 32nd Design Automation Conference.

[18]  Charles J. Alpert,et al.  The ISPD98 circuit benchmark suite , 1998, ISPD '98.

[19]  Jason Cong,et al.  Optimality and scalability study of existing placement algorithms , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems.

[20]  A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli,et al.  The TimberWolf placement and routing package , 1985, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits.

[21]  Satoshi Goto,et al.  An efficient algorithm for the two-dimensional placement problem in electrical circuit layout , 1981 .

[22]  Jason Cong,et al.  An interconnect-centric design flow for nanometer technologies , 2001, Proc. IEEE.

[23]  Majid Sarrafzadeh,et al.  Routability driven white space allocation for fixed-die standard-cell placement , 2002, ISPD '02.

[24]  Igor L. Markov,et al.  Benchmarking for large-scale placement and beyond , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems.

[25]  Jan M. Van Campenhout,et al.  Towards synthetic benchmark circuits for evaluating timing-driven CAD tools , 1999, ISPD '99.

[26]  Joseph R. Shinnerl,et al.  Multilevel optimization for large-scale circuit placement , 2000, IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer Aided Design. ICCAD - 2000. IEEE/ACM Digest of Technical Papers (Cat. No.00CH37140).

[27]  Malgorzata Marek-Sadowska,et al.  Interconnect complexity-aware FPGA placement using Rent's rule , 2001, SLIP '01.

[28]  William J. Dally,et al.  The role of custom design in ASIC chips , 2000, Proceedings 37th Design Automation Conference.