Comparison of two designs for the multifunction vehicle bus

In this paper, two designs for the decoder of the multifunction vehicle bus (MVB) are compared. The first one follows a bottom-up methodology and the second one has been created in a top-down style. Although this latter methodology is more systematic and easy to automate, it results in a lower performance. In the case of the MVB decoder, the ratio of bottom-up performance to the top-down one ranges from 1.90 to 4.12, depending on the synthesis tool and the device. Selecting as reference the tool and field-programmable gate array (FPGA) that use the fewest logical elements, the bottom-up design can work 2.3 times faster than the top-down one, after two and three iterations for the physical implementation, respectively. In both cases, the circuit has been synthesized on a Virtex-E XCV3200E of Xilinx by Xilinx Synthesis Tool (XST), so that there has been no shortage of physical resources. Therefore, for a particular pair of synthesis tool and device, the final implementation is determined by the design style and not by a hard placement and routing in a hostile fabric. After synthesis, the top-down design was 23.37% larger than the bottom-up design, so the results are not as poor as expected from a nonstructured design; however, this percentage, which is always positive, depends very strongly upon the particular synthesis tool and FPGA. In addition, both descriptions have been completely implemented in a similar CPU time (even the top-down one slightly more quickly, at the first attempt). So the top-down design style is a good candidate to produce circuits in a short time to market (in this case 28% lower), although synthesis tools must be improved in order to increase the performance.

[1]  A. Astarloa,et al.  Manchester decoding algorithm for multifunction vehicle bus , 2004, 2004 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, 2004. IEEE ICIT '04..

[2]  J. Lazaro,et al.  A top-down design for the train communication network , 2003, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, 2003.

[3]  Hubert D. Kirrmann,et al.  The IEC/IEEE Train Communication Network , 2001, IEEE Micro.

[4]  Patrick Schaumont,et al.  High Level Analysis of Clock Regions in a C++ System Description (Special Section on VLSI Design and CAD Algorithms) , 2000 .

[5]  A. Zuloaga,et al.  Slave node architecture for train communications networks , 2000, 2000 26th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society. IECON 2000. 2000 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Electronics, Control and Instrumentation. 21st Century Technologies.

[6]  Hiroshi Ryu,et al.  C++ based system simulator for pre-verification of system-on-a-chip devices : On SoC technology , 2000 .

[7]  VAtsushi Tsuchiya,et al.  A 0.9 V Low-power 16-bit DSP Based on a Top-down Design Methodology , 2000 .

[8]  Ed F. Deprettere,et al.  A Methodology for Architecture Exploration of Heterogeneous Signal Processing Systems , 2001, J. VLSI Signal Process..

[9]  C. Pixley,et al.  Formal verification of commercial integrated circuits , 2001 .

[10]  A. Zuloaga,et al.  Simulation environment to verify industrial communication circuits , 2002, IEEE 2002 28th Annual Conference of the Industrial Electronics Society. IECON 02.

[11]  I. Dick,et al.  Design and Test , 1991 .

[12]  David J. Webb,et al.  Design Methodology for a Large Communication Chip , 2000, IEEE Des. Test Comput..

[13]  Jan M. Rabaey,et al.  Limitations and challenges of computer-aided design technology for CMOS VLSI , 2001, Proc. IEEE.

[14]  Rolf Ernst,et al.  Codesign of Embedded Systems: Status and Trends , 1998, IEEE Des. Test Comput..

[15]  Kazutoshi Wakabayashi,et al.  C-based SoC design flow and EDA tools: an ASIC and system vendorperspective , 2000, IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst..

[16]  Minh N. Do,et al.  Youn-Long Steve Lin , 1992 .

[17]  Eduardo de la Torre,et al.  Design methodologies based on hardware description languages , 1999, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron..

[18]  Chris Rowen Reducing SoC Simulation and Development Time , 2002, Computer.

[19]  Ioannis G. Karafyllidis,et al.  A methodology for VLSI implementation of Cellular Automata algorithms using VHDL , 2001 .

[20]  Ed F. Deprettere,et al.  Exploring Embedded-Systems Architectures with Artemis , 2001, Computer.

[21]  Thomas W. Williams,et al.  An industrial view of electronic design automation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst..

[22]  José Luis Martín,et al.  TCN (train communication network) gateway for simulation , 2005 .

[23]  Rochit Rajsuman System-On-A-Chip: Design and Test , 2000 .

[24]  Daniel D. Gajski,et al.  High ― Level Synthesis: Introduction to Chip and System Design , 1992 .