A practical comparison of asynchronous design styles

It is well known that single-rail bundled-delay circuits provide good area efficiency but it can be difficult to match them with appropriate delay models. Conversely delay insensitive circuits such as those employing dual-rail codes are larger but it is easier to ensure timing correctness. In terms of speed bundled-delay circuits need conservative timing but dual-rail circuits can require an appreciable completion detection overhead. This paper compares designs in both of these styles and also a delay-insensitive 1-of-4 coded circuit using the practical example of an ARM Thumb instruction decoder The results show that, through the application of careful optimizations, the 1-of-4 circuits out-performed single-rail circuits and reduced the power compared to dual-rail circuits.

[1]  Jianwei Liu,et al.  Dynamic logic in four-phase micropipelines , 1996, Proceedings Second International Symposium on Advanced Research in Asynchronous Circuits and Systems.

[2]  William J. Dally,et al.  Digital systems engineering , 1998 .

[3]  Mark Horowitz,et al.  A zero-overhead self-timed 160-ns 54-b CMOS divider , 1991 .

[4]  Jerzy Tiuryn,et al.  Dynamic logic , 2001, SIGA.

[5]  Steven M. Nowick,et al.  High-throughput asynchronous pipelines for fine-grain dynamic datapaths , 2000, Proceedings Sixth International Symposium on Advanced Research in Asynchronous Circuits and Systems (ASYNC 2000) (Cat. No. PR00586).

[6]  Pascal Vivet,et al.  A contactless smart-card chip based on an asynchronous 8-bit microcontroller , 2000 .

[7]  Ran Ginosar,et al.  Average-case optimized technology mapping of one-hot domino circuits , 1998, Proceedings Fourth International Symposium on Advanced Research in Asynchronous Circuits and Systems.