A system-level methodology for fully compensating process variability impact of memory organizations in periodic applications

Process variability is an emerging problem that is becoming worse with each new technology node. Its impact on the performance and energy of memory organizations is severe and degrades the system-level parametric yield. In this paper we propose a broadly applicable system-level technique that can guarantee parametric yield on the memory organization and which minimizes the energy overhead associated to variability in the conventional design process. It is based on offering configuration capabilities at the memory-level and exploiting them at the system-level. This technique can decrease by up to a factor of 5 the energy overhead that is introduced by state-of-the-art process variability compensation techniques, including statistical timing analysis. In this way we obtain results close to the ideal nominal design again.

[1]  Kaushik Roy,et al.  Process variation in nano-scale memories: failure analysis and process tolerant architecture , 2004, Proceedings of the IEEE 2004 Custom Integrated Circuits Conference (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37571).

[2]  Hua Wang,et al.  Variable tapered pareto buffer design and implementation allowing run-time configuration for low-power embedded SRAMs , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems.

[3]  Yasuhisa Shimazaki,et al.  A 300-MHz 25-/spl mu/A/Mb-leakage on-chip SRAM module featuring process-variation immunity and low-leakage-active mode for mobile-phone application processor , 2004, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits.

[4]  Augustus K. Uht.  Going beyond worst-case specs with TEAtime , 2004, Computer.

[5]  Vivek De,et al.  Design and reliability challenges in nanometer technologies , 2004, Proceedings. 41st Design Automation Conference, 2004..

[6]  Gordon Russell,et al.  Design of sub-10-picoseconds on-chip time measurement circuit , 2004, Proceedings Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition.

[7]  Chandu Visweswariah,et al.  Death, taxes and failing chips , 2003, Proceedings 2003. Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37451).

[8]  David Blaauw,et al.  Making typical silicon matter with Razor , 2004, Computer.

[9]  C.H. Kim,et al.  An on-die CMOS leakage current sensor for measuring process variation in sub-90nm generations , 2004, 2005 International Conference on Integrated Circuit Design and Technology, 2005. ICICDT 2005..

[10]  Naresh R. Shanbhag,et al.  Reliable and efficient system-on-chip design , 2004, Computer.

[11]  N. Maeda,et al.  A 300MHz 25/spl mu/A/Mb leakage on-chip SRAM module featuring process-variation immunity and low-leakage-active mode for mobile-phone application processor , 2004, 2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37519).

[12]  Shih-Lien Lu.  Speeding Up Processing with Approximation Circuits , 2004, Computer.

[13]  W. Sansen,et al.  Physical modeling and prediction of the matching properties of MOSFETs , 2004, Proceedings of the 30th European Solid-State Circuits Conference (IEEE Cat. No.04EX850).

[14]  Anantha Chandrakasan,et al.  Data driven signal processing: an approach for energy efficient computing , 1996, ISLPED '96.

[15]  Sachin S. Sapatnekar,et al.  The Certainty of Uncertainty: Randomness in Nanometer Design , 2004, PATMOS.

[16]  A. Alvandpour,et al.  A process variation compensating technique for sub-90 nm dynamic circuits , 2003, 2003 Symposium on VLSI Circuits. Digest of Technical Papers (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37408).