FastPlace 3.0: A Fast Multilevel Quadratic Placement Algorithm with Placement Congestion Control
ASP-DAC '07 Proceedings of the 2007 Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference
A study of Through-Silicon-Via impact on the 3D stacked IC layout
Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Computer-Aided Design
TSV-aware analytical placement for 3D IC designs
Proceedings of the 48th Design Automation Conference
Full-chip TSV-to-TSV coupling analysis and optimization in 3D IC
Proceedings of the 48th Design Automation Conference
IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems
Kraftwerk2—A Fast Force-Directed Quadratic Placement Approach Using an Accurate Net Model
IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems
Geometric approach to chip-scale TSV shield placement for the reduction of TSV coupling in 3D-ICs
Proceedings of the 23rd ACM international conference on Great lakes symposium on VLSI
Thermal stress aware 3D-IC statistical static timing analysis
Proceedings of the 23rd ACM international conference on Great lakes symposium on VLSI
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In 3D ICs, TSV cross coupling can seriously degrade circuit performance if it is not sufficiently considered in a design. Cross coupling is heavily dependent on how TSVs are placed, and should be considered during the floorplanning of the chip. In this work we propose a coupling-aware TSV placement algorithm that attempts to reduce both wirelength and TSV cross coupling. TSV shielding is another method for coupling mitigation, and the proposed algorithm combines coupling-aware TSV placement with shield insertion to yield better results than either technique alone. With regard to the most heavily coupled TSV pair in a design, our results show that applying both techniques simultaneously produces a 12.3% improvement in maximum S-parameter compared to traditional TSV placement which optimizes wirelength only. Using coupling-aware TSV placement or shield insertion alone produces a 4.2% and 4.8% improvement respectively. The improvement offered by using both techniques simultaneously is actually more than the sum of the improvement offered by using each technique on its own. This implies that the two techniques are not independent of one another, and that when used simultaneously each technique increases the effectiveness of the other, giving strong motivation for using them both simultaneously. Furthermore, the percent increase in wirelength due to using these two techniques is an order of magnitude less than the percent improvement to coupling, justifying the tradeoff made by our algorithm.