webinar banner AI 2026 v2
Semiconductor Expert Forum

Posted on

DesignCon 2017 and Mentor Graphics

DesignCon 2017 and Mentor Graphics
by Daniel Nenni on 01-17-2017 at 7:00 am
Categories: EDA, Events, Siemens EDA

It’s hard to believe but this is DesignCon #22 and being a Silicon Valley conference I have attended my fair share of them. This year it seems like high speed communications will take the lead followed by the latest on PCB design tools, power and signal integrity, jitter and crosstalk, test and measurement tools, parallel and memory interface design, ICs, semiconductor components, etc…

About DesignCon
DesignCon is the world’s premier conference for chip, board, and systems design engineers in the high-speed communications and semiconductor communities.DesignCon, created by engineers for engineers, takes place annually in Silicon Valley and remains the largest gathering of chip, board, and systems designers in the country. This three-day technical conference and expo combines technical paper sessions, tutorials, industry panels, product demos and exhibits from the industry’s leading experts and solutions providers. More information is available at: designcon.com. DesignCon is organized by UBM Americas, a part of UBM plc (UBM.L), an Events First marketing and communications services business. For more information, visit ubmamericas.com.

The conference theme this year lands squarely inside Mentor’s wheelhouse so they will be hard to miss. The Mentor HyperLynx product family will be front and center in the Mentor booth. If you are interested in any of the following technologies you will definitely want to stop by booth #1043 for demos and chats with experts:

HyperLynx Signal Integrity
Quickly identify and resolve Signal Integrity issues. Includes advanced tools for optimizing DDRx design, SERDES design projects, FastEye diagram analysis, S-parameter simulation, and BER prediction.

HyperLynx Power Integrity
Accurately model power distribution networks and noise propagation mechanisms throughout the PCB design process.

HyperLynx DRC
Accelerates electrical signoff with built-in comprehensive rule-sets or customized rule checks for issues affecting EMI/EMC, signal integrity, and power integrity.

HyperLynx Full-Wave Solver
A powerful 3D, broadband, full-wave electromagnetic solver providing unprecedented speed and capacity, while preserving gold-standard Maxwell accuracy.

Frontline InStack Design
An automatic stackup design solution to find the best possible stackup for your board, optimizing and balancing between quality, manufacturability and price.

Special live presentations include:

  • Modeling and simulating DDR transactions involving buffer transitions between receive and transmit states
  • Channel Operating Margin (COM) for PAM-4 links with support for Tx non-linearity and time skew
  • Optimization methods for high speed SerDes channels using COM metric

Mentor has a copy of the DesignCon 2016 Best Paper Award winner available HERE. This paper analyzes the computational procedure specified for Channel Operating Margin and compares it to the traditional eye/BER analysis.

In concert, Mentor also has “A Practical, Hands-on Essential Principles of SI Boot Camp” featuring Eric Bogatin on January 31[SUP]st[/SUP] at their Fremont campus. From what I am told Eric is an SI guru so you are not going to want to miss this. In case you do miss it we will have a SemiWiki blogger there so stay tuned to SemiWiki.com for complete coverage.

Abstract:
If you are confused about signal integrity and want to get a jump start understanding the most important essential principles in signal integrity, this is the workshop for you. We will explore the principles and best design practices using simulation exercises in HyperLynx.

Using short lectures and demos, we introduce more than 50 important design examples everyone will work through as virtual prototypes.

Eric Bogatin received his BS in physics from MIT and MS and PhD in physics from the University of Arizona in Tucson. He has held senior engineering and management positions at Bell Labs, Raychem, Sun Microsystems, Ansoft and Interconnect Devices. He has written six technical books in the field and presented classes and lectures on signal integrity world wide.

Posted on

Intel Conveys Compute Card Capabilities at CES

Intel Conveys Compute Card Capabilities at CES
by Tom Simon on 01-16-2017 at 12:00 pm
Categories: Intel Foundry, IoT

Intel is once again adding a new computing form factor to the mix. At CES Intel announced its new Intel Compute Card. It combines CPU, GPU, DRAM, storage, WiFi, and communications inside a small modular housing slightly larger than a credit card and about 5mm thick. Intel already offers its Compute Stick, but it is limited in its interface options. The compute Stick only supports HDMI along with USB and WiFi, making it a bit limited. Unlike the Compute Stick which seemed to be promoted as a highly portable computer that can turn and HDMI monitor into a useful PC, the Compute Card is intended to provide the brains for a number of applications, such as smart TV’s, appliances, IoT devices, etc.

The question is, what does it offer in these applications that ‘hardwired’ processing does not allow?

The Compute Card has a proprietary connector set on its end that allows it to plug into its host. Intel describes the interface as a modified USB-C. This enables it to connect to a wide range of devices, such as hdmi, storage, PCIe, potential future interfaces, etc. Because standard interfaces are not brought out to connectors, it will not operate as a standalone device.

The Compute Stick was said to have low performance, although it was improved in the second generation. The Compute Card is planned to offer a wide range of CPU’s not just the low-end Atom cores. The upper end of the power dissipation is said to be around 6W. One nice difference from its predecessor is that the Compute Card has no cooling fan, which could have been a potential reliability issue. Apparently the dock (or socket) provides some cooling in addition to a ‘locking mechanism’ to prevent removal where security is a factor.

So, is the Compute Card an embedded processor or is it a portable compute device? In the embedded processor space there is a wide range of options, from both Intel and through ARM based processor providers. It seems that major appliances that need would be built around a specific processor and chipset. While the Compute Card touts upgradability and future proofing for its hosts, it’s not clear that upgrading the processor, if it proves practical, will extend the life of appliances. Indeed, smart appliances may not actually outlive their processing units.

Nevertheless, it is conceivable that repairs could be made easier by a plug in compute unit. But this could be offset by connector or thermal issues with the Compute Card packaging/dock.

If the goal is to provide a portable computing resource, it needs to be compared to alternatives offered through virtual machines. A thumb drive or SD card can easily contain a complete virtual machine environment that can run on a wide range of hardware. Why not just use this to offer a portable environment? Alternatively, the cloud has become a given in terms of user environment. With Google Drive or DropBox, you can easily pull up your personal documents or environment just about anywhere on any compute resource.

To be fair, I was skeptical of virtual machines, but as technology improved they became practical. This took a few decades in actuality. And, they never be as efficient as bare metal, rather they offer flexibility and convenience without a severe penalty. In fact I know of several websites that solved their server bandwidth issues by reverting to bare metal. But that is another story.

Intel has signed up partners to help develop Compute Card enabled products. These partners include Dell, Lenovo, HP, Sharp, as well as InFocus, Seneca and others. The rest of us will need to wait until June of 2017 to get pricing and detailed specifications. Likewise, they will be available for purchase in the middle of the year.

A lot of the utility depends on the actual specifications, price/performance ratio, and the details of the necessary ancillary hardware, such as the dock. Presumably the Compute Card will run Windows and likely Linux too. The OS will also play heavily into potential applications and market acceptance.

It is too early to tell if this will be part of a significant shift in the development of smart products or for the Internet of Things. I plan on watching it with guarded expectations. Much of what we have seen recently points to the extremely high utility of products based on custom SOC’s and advanced packaging such as TSMC’s CoWoS and InFO technology. For instance, ARM cores are available for silicon integration through a large number of SOC and Virtual ASIC vendors. However, just as with virtual machines, only time will tell if there will be significant market acceptance for the Intel Compute Card.

Posted on

Fed Panel Asks Today: Why Waymo?

Fed Panel Asks Today: Why Waymo?
by Roger C. Lanctot on 01-16-2017 at 12:00 pm
Categories: Automotive

The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) is holding the first meeting today of a new advisory committee focused, in its own words: “on automation across a number of modes.” The committee, made up of an array of experts from a variety of fields, is “to immediately begin work on some of the most pressing and relevant matters facing transportation today, including the development and deployment of automated vehicles, and determining the needs of the Department as it continues with its relevant research, policy, and regulations.”

The big question facing the panel (members listed below) is: Why? Why are we pursuing automated driving?

It was the U.S. government that got us into the automated driving business with the DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Challenge in 2004. The intent of the original project was to make one third of ground military forces autonomous by 2015. By the time of the multiple Gulf Wars the objective was to develop robotic vehicles that might help protect military personnel from roadside improvised explosive devices.

DARPA’s efforts were preceded by decades of work around the world to perfect automated driving. DARPA was the first organization to identify a commercially viable use case – though we still do not have an automated battlefield.

Google picked up the mantle years later with its own self-driving car effort – advancing the technology philosophically by suggesting that the steering wheel and brake and accelerator pedals be removed and by testing the vehicles on public roads. Google was the first to propose that self-driving vehicles belonged on public roads.

More provocatively, Google presented the case that nothing less than testing on public roads would be sufficient to enable automated driving. In spite of or in reaction to that proposition California regulators required the inclusion of steering wheels and brake and accelerator pedals and the presence of a driver in autonomous test vehicles. It was at this point and on these terms that the current struggle has unfolded.

The business case for Google was to provide transportation options for economically or physically disadvantaged populations. One branch of the Google team ultimately left to pursue commercial vehicle automated driving opportunities (Otto). More than a dozen other startups have targeted public and private driverless shuttle transportation opportunities.

What remains is defining the objective for automated driving and a reasonable and regulated path to market. Auto makers are building Potemkin villages for the purposes of testing cars in real-world-ish scenarios, while technology companies are building simulators to more rapidly compile and analyze the billions of miles necessary to achieve certifiable results. It is clear, though, that nothing less than testing in real world scenarios will advance the technology to the goal of full automation.

But why is the industry suddenly obsessed with this activity – especially given the reality that self-driving cars likely represent a completely different usage scenario not likely to include actual ownership? The interest of the public revolves around testing on public roads and the ultimate objective of reducing highway fatalities. The interest of car makers and regulators is the evolutionary path to autonomy that is expected to make cars safer to drive … or ride in.
Waymo talks about creating a “better driver” which is too high a bar for short-term commercial opportunities. What is a better driver, anyway?

Actually building an automated driving system capable of surpassing human drivers in all driving circumstances will be a decades-long exercise. It is not a reasonable objective.

Toyota Research Institute CEO Dr. Gil Pratt describes this “better driver” dream as the “chauffeur” mode, where the vehicle is doing all of the driving vs. the guardian angel mode where the vehicle assists in what it perceives as urgently dangerous circumstances or simpler tasks. Regulators have done their best to bring guardian angel technologies to the market such as electronic stability control (ESC) and anti-lock brakes (ABS).

Now the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is pushing for the adoption of Automatic Emergency Brakes on a voluntary basis. But this voluntary effort points up the limitations of the agency. Were NHTSA to press for a mandate, the process would like require nearly a decade of regulatory action.

It was DARPA that opened up the autonomous vehicle conversation. It was Google that issued the call to action – forcing a regulatory response. Now it is the auto industry, insurance companies, city/state/Federal regulators that are coming together to find common cause.

The “why” of autonomous vehicles boils down to:

[LIST=1]

  • Reducing highway fatalities (along with congestion and emissions)
  • Creating transportation opportunities for economically and physically disadvantaged populations
  • Improving safety, productivity and efficiency in the commercial trucking and public transportation industries
  • Creating new networked urban transportation alternatives
  • Extending U.S. leadership in global transportation

    In the words of outgoing Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx: “This new automation committee will work to advance life-saving innovations while boosting our economy and making our transportation network more fair, reliable, and efficient.”

    For car makers, insurance companies, taxi/bus/truck drivers, automated driving actually represents a threat to business as usual. But Federal, city and state regulators are now in the driver’s seat with everything to gain from a future defined by automated driving. It will be interesting to see how these parties find common ground. The choice of co-chairs, alone, speaks volumes.
    1. Co-Chair:Mary Barra- General Motors, Chairman and CEO
    2. Co-Chair: Eric Garcetti- Mayor of Los Angeles, CA
    3. Vice Chair: Dr. J. Chris Gerdes- Stanford University, Professor of Engineering
    4. Gloria Boyland- FedEx, Corporate Vice President, Operations & Service Support
    5. Robin Chase- Zipcar; Buzzcar; Veniam, Co-founder of Zipcar and Veniam
    6. Douglas Chey- Hyperloop One, Senior Vice President of Systems Development
    7. Henry Claypool- Community Living Policy Center, Policy Director
    8. Mick Cornett- Mayor of Oklahoma City, OK
    9. Mary “Missy” Cummings- Duke University, Director, Humans and Autonomy Lab, Pratt School of Engineering
    10. Dean Garfield- Information Technology Industry Council, President and CEO
    11. Mary Gustanski- Delphi Automotive, Vice President of Engineering & Program Management
    12. Debbie Hersman- National Safety Council, President and CEO
    13. Rachel Holt- Uber, Regional General Manager, United States and Canada
    14. Lisa Jackson- Apple, Vice President of Environment, Policy, and Social Initiatives
    15. Tim Kentley-Klay – Zoox, Co-founder and CEO
    16. John Krafcik- Waymo, CEO
    17. Gerry Murphy- Amazon, Senior Corporate Counsel, Aviation
    18. Robert Reich- University of California, Berkeley, Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy, Richard and Rhoda Goldman School of Public Policy
    19. Keller Rinaudo- Zipline International, CEO
    20. Chris Spear- American Trucking Association (ATA), President and CEO
    21. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger- Safety Reliability Methods, Inc., Founder and CEO
    22. Bryant Walker Smith- University of South Carolina, Assistant Professor, School of Law and (by courtesy) School of Engineering
    23. Jack Weekes- State Farm Insurance, Operations Vice President, Innovation Team
    24. Ed Wytkind- President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO
    25. John Zimmer- Lyft, Co-founder and President

    Roger C. Lanctot is Associate Director in the Global Automotive Practice at Strategy Analytics. More details about Strategy Analytics can be found here: https://www.strategyanalytics.com/access-services/automotive#.VuGdXfkrKUk

    • Posted on

    CEO Interview: Toshio Nakama of S2C

    CEO Interview: Toshio Nakama of S2C
    by Daniel Nenni on 01-16-2017 at 7:00 am
    Categories: CEO Interviews, Prototyping, S2C EDA

    I haven’t sat down to speak with S2C since we collaborated on the book, PROTOTYPICAL, published just before DAC 2016 and even then, I hadn’t spoken to Toshio Nakama, their CEO. Toshio splits his time between the San Jose headquarters and the Shanghai headquarters so getting time to meet face-to-face has been challenging. I was finally able to sit down with him to discuss the latest in FPGAs and prototyping and what’s next for S2C. Here is a snapshot of our discussion.

    How Has FPGA Prototyping Evolved and What’s Next?
    Toshio: FPGA prototyping has traditionally been thought of as an adjunct to emulation – something that was nice to have but because of its complexities of employment was never fully adopted. Times have changed however, FPGA prototyping has become much easier to use and because of increasing design complexity it has become a must-have tool in the design and verification flow. Partitioning the design has always been one of the hurdles to adoption, but FPGA partition tools have advanced to handle even the largest designs while FPGAs themselves have increased in capacity to reduce the number of FPGAs needed.

    As to the second part of your question, FPGA prototyping is being used more and more by dispersed design and verification teams. No longer are singular teams all sitting together in the same room or the same office for that matter. To accommodate this FPGA prototyping must take to the cloud and allow globalized teams to share resources. In fact, FPGA prototyping solutions must also allow teams working on multiple designs to share resources and not limit the shared resources to a single design or instance.

    What Is Unique About S2C?
    Toshio: We are experts in FPGA prototyping. We are proud to have the largest team dedicated to the technology of FPGA prototyping. Our expertise comes from the development of hundreds of customized prototyping environments that have created a very robust engineering knowledge base for developing reliable, easy-to-implement, and extremely efficient solutions. We have consistently made sure to push the boundaries of what FPGA prototyping can do so that our customers can gain a competitive advantage.

    Through our many interactions with customers, we’ve realized that scalability is a key component. Our customers’ complex designs have given rise to untethered scalability. Increased I/O counts, significant memory throughput, and a large number of DSPs have become commonplace.

    How Do Designers Get the Most Out of FPGA Prototyping?
    Toshio: There are many ways for that to happen. One significant solution is to make FPGA prototyping part of your overall design process. I believe, Mon-Ren Chene, our CTO, mentions this in the book that you published. Designers can benefit greatly by designing with prototyping in mind. Doing so will speed up the prototyping process down the road and help with synthesis, partitioning and debug. As we outlined in the book, there are six ways that designing for prototyping can be achieved: Prototyping-friendly design hierarchies, block-based prototyping, a clean and well-defined clock network, memory modeling, register placement, and avoiding asynchronous or latch-based circuits.

    Do You See FPGA Prototyping Expanding Its Role Beyond SoCs?
    Toshio: Advances in FPGAs has opened the door to new areas of adoption. We’re seeing the benefits for areas related to high-performance computing and artificial intelligence. We’re already addressing the HPC market with our upcoming unveiling of our Prodigy Arria 10 Logic Module. We’re excited to see that the benefits of FPGAs can be realized beyond traditional markets. Stay tuned for lots more to come from S2C on these fronts.

    About S2C
    Founded and headquartered in San Jose, California, S2C has been successfully delivering rapid SoC prototyping solutions since 2003. S2C provides:

    With over 200 customers and more that 800 systems installed, S2C’s focus is on SoC/ASIC development to reduce the SoC design cycle. Our highly qualified engineering team and customer-centric sales force understands our users’ SoC development needs. S2C systems have been deployed by leaders in consumer electronics, communications, computing, image processing, data storage, research, defense, education, automotive, medical, design services, and silicon IP. S2C is headquartered in San Jose, CA with offices and distributors around the globe including the UK, Israel, China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan. For more information, visit www.s2cinc.com.

    Also Read:

    CTO Interview: Mohamed Kassem of efabless

    IEDM 2016 – Marie Semeria LETI Interview

    CEO Interview: Dündar Dumlugöl of Magwel

    Posted on

    California Rules the Road

    California Rules the Road
    by Roger C. Lanctot on 01-16-2017 at 7:00 am
    Categories: Automotive

    California’s influence on the global automotive industry remains intact at the start of 2017 in spite of the state’s strict licensing for autonomous vehicle testing on public roads. California managed to chase Uber away with that licensing requirement, but in the process the state has established a benchmark for data collection from autonomous vehicles that has provided a glimpse into the performance of these vehicles on California roads.

    As of Dec. 8, 2016, 20 companies had registered for the program and Alphabet’s Waymo spinoff has proudly touted the steady improvement of the miles-driven-between-intervention statistics for its automated vehicles. California’s greatest impact on the automotive industry, though, has emanated from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and its emissions testing regime.

    We have CARB to think for the global requirement for an OBDII port in internal combustion or diesel equipped passenger vehicles. OBDII ports and emissions testing played a prominent role in the industry in 2016. That impact is continuing into 2017.

    But California legislators may extend their influence further with the onset of new vehicle-related laws and regulations that took effect Jan. 1, 2017. The California Highway Patrol was kind enough to reach out to California drivers to bring them up to speed on these new laws:

    https://www.chp.ca.gov/PressReleases/Pages/New-Traffic-Safety-Laws-Take-Effect-in-2017.aspx

    Most prominent of these laws was AB 1785, Use of Wireless Electronic Devices. Given the wide variation and enforcement of anti-texting and anti-phone-use-while-driving laws across the 50 U.S. states, one might hope the rest of the nation and indeed the world might take its cue from California in this case – even if the state is actually following Europe’s lead.

    The new law is very specific in that it forbids motorists from holding a wireless telephone or electronic wireless communications device while driving a motor vehicle. According to the new law, mobile devices must be mounted in the 7-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed from the driver or in a 5-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield nearest to the driver.

    Another option is to affix the device to the dashboard in a place that does not obstruct the driver’s clear view of the road and does not interfere with the deployment of an air bag. The law does allow a driver to operate one of these devices with the motion of a single swipe or tap of the finger, but not while holding it.

    I have long advocated a national don’t-touch-your-phone-while-driving law for the U.S. California is now enforcing the nation’s first. And given the fact that it is easier to enforce, I advise caution and compliance when driving in California.

    Other California laws that took effect Jan. 1, 2017 include:

    AB 53: Children less than two years of age must ride rear-facing in an appropriate child passenger safety seat. Children weighing 40 or more pounds, or standing 40 or more inches tall, are exempt. California law continues to require that all children under the age of eight be properly restrained in an appropriate child safety seat in the back seat of a vehicle.

    SB 1046    : Requires a DUI offender to install an ignition interlock device on their vehicle for a specified period of time in order to get a restricted driver’s license or to reinstate their license. The law also removes the required suspension time before a person can get a restricted license, provided that the offender installs an IID on their vehicle. The law extends the current four-county pilot program until Jan. 1, 2019, at which time all DUI offenders statewide will be required to install the device to have their license reinstated. Currently Sacramento, Los Angeles, Alameda and Tulare counties are piloting the program.

    AB 51    : Lane splitting by a motorcyclist remains legal if done safely. This bill defines lane splitting as driving a motorcycle, which has two wheels in contact with the ground, between rows of stopped or moving vehicles in the same lane. The bill permits the California Highway Patrol to develop lane splitting educational safety guidelines in consultation with other state traffic safety agencies and at least one organization focused on motorcycle safety.

    SB 1072    : Requires all school buses, school pupil activity buses, youth buses and child care motor vehicles used to transport school-age children to be equipped with a child safety alert system. Every school is required to have a transportation safety plan with procedures to ensure that a pupil is not left unattended in a vehicle.

    SB 247    : All buses manufactured after July 1, 2020, will be required to have emergency lighting fixtures that will turn on in the event of an impact or collision. The law also requires a bus company to ensure the driver of the charter bus provides oral and written, or video instructions to all passengers on safety equipment and emergency exits on the bus before any trip.

    AB 1677    : Requires the CHP to develop protocols for entering into a memorandum of understanding with local governments to increase the number of inspections for tour buses operated within their jurisdiction.

    There are other areas where California may take the lead. California is currently piloting road use charging (RUC) hardware and software for mileage-based tolling similar to a system already in place in Portland, Ore. California is also ground zero for car sharing and ride hailing clashes and San Francisco, in particular, is a proving ground for innovative parking systems and solutions.

    California is also home to private toll roads and road use restrictions – as in the case of Market Street in San Francisco. And both Los Angeles and San Francisco have long histories seeking to leverage Waze’s traffic app to their advantage while mitigating the negative impacts of its ad hoc traffic advice.

    California may see its influence on the automotive industry erode, though, if it fails to ease its restrictions on autonomous vehicle testing. California’s mild weather makes for an ideal testbed for autonomous vehicles, but developers appear determined to seek more forgiving venues.

    And, finally, the State of New Jersey’s legislature may steal a bit of California’s thunder should it pass legislation calling for the creation of an Emergency Contact Notification database. The legislature will see introduction of such a measure next Monday, Jan. 23rd. Should it pass it would set in motion the creation of a nationwide National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (NLETS) database tied to the vehicle identification number.

    The impetus for the New Jersey legislation derived from the efforts of the family of Sara Dubinin, an unconscious crash victim who passed away before she could be identified and family members notified of her condition. Similar legislation is pending in California, but New Jersey may now take the lead. The impact of this legislation will transform emergency response at crash scenes and will serve as a model for emergency response globally.

    Many auto industry observers have expressed concern at the fragmentation that can result from individual states pursuing different regulatory paths. But sometimes, that fragmentation actually pays dividends when individual states like New Jersey take the opportunity of their local authority to lead and advance the cause of safety.

    Posted on

    Three Interesting Things from TSMC!

    Three Interesting Things from TSMC!
    by Daniel Nenni on 01-13-2017 at 12:00 pm
    Categories: Foundries, TSMC

    First, the TSMC Museum of Innovation is now open and it’s quite impressive. Located right below Fab 12, it is definitely worth an hour of your time. Second, Morris Chang was on the investor call which made it much more interesting, especially his comments on the recent Report to the President on U.S. semiconductor leadership. Third, TSMC will be the first with EUV in production at 7nm.

    The TSMC Museum of Innovation encompasses three exhibition galleries: “A World of Innovation”, “Unleashing Innovation”, and “Dr. Morris Chang, TSMC Founder”. Through interactive technology, digital content, and historical documents we will learn about the pervasiveness of ICs in our daily lives and about their continued advancement. In addition, we will learn how ICs are making our lives more fulfilling and how they are driving technology beyond our imagination. We will also learn how TSMC contributes to global IC innovation and to Taiwan’s economy.

    Unfortunately, I was on a plane during the TSMC investor call but I did listen to the replay and read the transcript. As I predicted in my Double Digit Growth and 10nm for TSMC in 2016! blog, TSMC had a very good 2016 and I will again predict double digit revenue growth for 2017, absolutely.

    In case you have not seen it yet, the REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT Ensuring Long – Term U.S. Leadership in Semiconductors was published last week so of course it came up in the TSMC call Q&A. The response came from Morris who countered and said TSMC has created thousands of jobs by authoring the pure-play foundry business model in 1987 (yes this is the 30[SUP]th[/SUP] year of TSMC and the fabless semiconductor industry). Morris also pointed out that this report was to Obama and not to Trump and shared an interesting anecdote about presidential reports:

    I mean, we have history to guide us. In fact, just tell you an anecdote, in 2006 I met President Bush, then President of the United States, and at that time his, President Bush’s, task force, advisory task force on Iraq, had just submitted a report, basically recommended the U.S. withdrawing from Iraq. And President Bush did not adopt the recommendation. He actually adopted the contrary, which was to increase his troops in Iraq. So I mean that’s just an example that quickly came to my mind, when somebody talks about, ah, report has been written.

    One thing you should know about Morris is that he is a very well read military history enthusiast and has a remarkable memory. While I’m not necessarily equating business to war there is much to be learned in regards to strategy, leadership, and human nature.

    The other interesting nugget on the call is about 7nm and EUV. TSMC now has definitive plans to insert EUV into 7nm:

    Mark Liu
    So we think 7 nanometer is a well adopted node by all the customers and we plan for the subsequent technology to shore up the demand continuously. And we hope to use this technology – I mean the second-year technology to prepare for the EUV production experience for the full fleshed EUV technology on 5. So then our customers can have a very hopefully smooth getting to from our 7 to our 5 nanometer technology. So that is the how we maintain our technology competitiveness.

    Translation: TSMC will be the first to 7nm EUV production, yes?

    Posted on

    Getting Ready for Bluetooth-5 Verification

    Getting Ready for Bluetooth-5 Verification
    by Bernard Murphy on 01-13-2017 at 7:00 am
    Categories: Cadence, EDA, IoT, Mobile

    Bluetooth has been very successful for many years, but arguably trapped in a niche, at least for us consumers, as a short-range wireless alternative to a wire connection – to connect your phone to a car or speakers for example. (In fairness I should add that the 4.2 version has improved range and Bluetooth has already become quite successful in the IoT). But the Bluetooth special interest group has had bigger ambitions, now apparent in the recently released Bluetooth 5 (BT5) standard.

    Part of the improvement is of course in extending metrics – 2X the speed, 4X the range, 8X message capacity, all with (I am told) an even better low-energy profile than BLE. Great though those improvements are, they don’t really sum up the capabilities and importance of BT5.

    Start with range. Practical range is expected to be up to 120 meters, easily matching WiFi. But it gets better. BT5 supports mesh networking which means that instead of the old-style point-to-point pairing familiar in earlier versions, registration is now “friend-to-friend”, meaning you can register with a network (or be pulled in as a friend) and then have access to all nodes in the mesh. All of which makes BT5 a serious contender for home automation, connecting your phone to the fridge, lights, thermostat and your TV, and office automation, connecting to printers, projectors and other assets.

    Incidentally, this explains why it is increasingly common to find radios supporting both ZigBee/Thread and BT5 (the ARM Cordio radio offers this option). As a chip-maker, you don’t want to bet on Zigbee or Thread for home automation and then find popular demand just as interested in BT5.

    BT5 also offers beaconing to support local position-awareness (such as in a mall) and local push-advertising (you’re looking for shoes, we have a great deal in our store, which is just on your right), where high-capacity support allows for pushing richer content. As far as I can tell, BT5 is the only contender today in this space, so is pretty much set to own this market.

    So there’s huge potential for products in consumer, retail, emergency medical and logistics applications to name just a few, but of course all that functionality means there’s a lot more you have to verify to prove your design is compliant with the standard while also supporting the earlier 4.2 standard. You need a full spec compliance VIP and verification methodology to get there. Just to give you a hint, the spec approaches 3000 pages, so building your own test plan, coverage plan and test sequences is not a task for the faint of heart.

    Cadence has a well-established history in providing VIPs and especially in keeping up with the latest protocols. Scott Jacobson (product marketing director for verification IP at Cadence) told me that given the Cadence focus on VIP they can afford to put a lot of effort into preparing full-spec VIPs ahead of the market. They provide a capability they call TripleCheck which includes a test suite, a coverage plan and a verification plan. These are all customizable.

    TripleCheck provides an extensive library of test sequences to stimulate the design under test. The test library contains directed tests (providing quick checks for common protocol compliance issues) as well as constrained-random test sequences for exhaustive testing to detect corner-case bugs hidden in the design. Tests support error injection in each layer of the protocol stack to check operation of the design when faced with non-compliant stimulus. This combination of directed and constrained-random tests results in high functional coverage, right out of the box. I should also mention that you can model multiple radios, a capability that is apparently becoming increasingly common.

    Coverage models are provided for both SystemVerilog and ‘e’. The coverage models are open and documented, allowing you to add application-specific extensions.

    The solution also comes with a verification plan mirroring the protocol specification. All requirements in the specification are listed in the plan and organized according to (specification) chapter and paragraph hierarchy. The plan is linked to the coverage model and is provided in XML to ease portability between simulation environments. If you’re using Cadence vManager, the plan simply integrates into that environment.

    You can learn more about the Cadence Bluetooth 5 VIP solution HERE.

    More articles by Bernard…

    Posted on

    Making the Move from 28nm to FinFET!

    Making the Move from 28nm to FinFET!
    by Daniel Nenni on 01-12-2017 at 12:00 pm
    Categories: Arm, FinFET, IP, TSMC

    If you click FinFET in the SemiWiki.com Latest News: navigation bar at the top of this page you will get a list of 86 blogs that have been viewed more than 600,000 times. If you go to the last blogs on the list, meaning the first blogs to be published, you will see a three part series, “Introduction to FinFET Technology” written by Tom Dillinger (ChipGuy), starting in March of 2012. That series has been viewed more than 60,000 times and is still getting traffic. Rumor has it Tom is writing a book on FinFETs to be published later this year so the series continues (in print).

    Even though we have had FinFETs in production for quite some time now a significant amount of design work is still done on 28nm and above. Now that we have the cost effective TSMC 16FFC process and the even more cost effective (soon to be announced) TSMC 12nm, it’s time to get more competitive and say good-bye to planar devices, absolutely.

    And ARM is going to help us do just that with their upcoming webinar:

    Making the move from 28nm to 16nm FinFET: easy as POP!

    Live Webinar: 9:00 am – 10:00 am PST and 5:00 – 6:00 pm PST
    January 17, 2017

    REGISTER HERE

    The TSMC 16FFC process is a lower cost FinFET option that targets a wide range of applications. So consequently, many ARM-based partners are interested in moving from a traditional CMOS manufacturing process technology to using the FinFET process. However, designers are unsure of the challenges that may be encountered when moving to FinFET.

    To facilitate meeting these new process challenges, ARM’s physical design group developed implementation solutions in both TSMC 28HPC+ and TSMC 16FFC, to both optimize and accelerate the implementation of ARM-based SoC designs. Using the latest ARM Cortex®-A73 processor as a case study, this webinar will summarize deep technical findings collected from a variety of implementation trials. We will share and discuss process differences, power grid creation challenges, floor planning differences (due to fin pitch requirements), key enhancements in clock tree synthesis, and revised signoff criteria.

    If you are thinking of making the move to a FinFET technology process, this is one webinar that you do not want to miss!

    And if you are designing an SoC, ARM also has a webinar for you:

    Three Tips to Maximize your SoC performance

    Live Webinar: 9:00 am – 10:00 am PST and 5:00 pm – 6:00 pm PST
    January 24, 2017

    REGISTER HERE

    CPU performance is highly dependent on choices such as: processor speed, cache size, interconnect, memory speed, data ordering, data width and optimal integration of the IP blocks. In addition to focusing on the CPU, ARM also fulfills extensive system performance analysis work to ensure that the optimal configuration options are chosen by the designer.

    Join this free webinar to understand more about the methodologies and analysis techniques used at ARM, plus how these link to CPU performance. This webinar will introduce some of the SoC design work carried out by ARM, with data for SoCs targeting mobile and server/networking applications.

    If you can’t make it to the live versions, still register and they will send you a link to the replay. I can also have SemiWiki bloggers attend them so they can share their opinions, observations, and experiences.

    Posted on

    Cyber Risks Compound with Technology Adoption

    Cyber Risks Compound with Technology Adoption
    by Matthew Rosenquist on 01-12-2017 at 7:00 am
    Categories: Security

    AAEAAQAAAAAAAAj AAAAJDQwNjJmNmEzLTc4NmQtNDM2My1hZTJiLTVkYTg3YjU3ODVkMg

    Just how reliant are we on computing infrastructure? Sometimes it takes just a little outage to get a taste of the interwoven dependency we don’t readily see.

    It can be small. The international travelers landing in U.S. airports on January 3rd, one of the busiest travel days of the year, found themselves stuck in long lines due to a temporary outage with the customs processing system. Mobs of disgruntled holiday travelers waited for the issue to clear up. Airports across the country reported delays from half an hour to over two hours.

    Lines of Travelers
    Source: pic.twitter.com/VGLUOUiaoP (with approval)

    The technical issue, not attributed to a cyber attack, impacted the travel of over 30 flights into Miami International. In Atlanta, at the biggest airport in the world, Hartsfield-Jackson was impacted for 90 minutes.

    Even the most mundane things, like crossing a border, can be impacted when technology goes awry. Modern day systems are built for efficiency therefore have deeper dependencies on upstream components. Like dominoes, when one thing breaks, the ecosystem is not built to absorb the loss and instead comes to a grinding halt. This creates a backup and like ripples in a pond have far reaching consequences.

    Social without Internet
    In October 2016, simple devices connected to the Internet were recruited by attackers to form a botnet and collectively sent network traffic to Dyn, a Domain Name System (DNS), internet service company, which resulted in significant blackouts and slowness to major Internet sites like Twitter, Spotify, Reddit, the New York Times, Wired, Github, Etsy, and many others. It became a stinging Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack the likes we have not seen in years.


    Source: Downdetector.com

    DDoS attacks are not new. They have been around for many years. Technology infrastructure and security services have evolved to protect against such attacks, making them largely ineffective. Until recently that is. When instead of big powerful systems trying to cause damage, attackers shifted tactics and approached it like a colony of ants. Home routers, DVD players, consumer internet cameras, and a host of other small IoT devices were harvested like crops and their collective power was pointed at targets. The impact was unprecedented. A number of such attacks, starting in the back half of 2016, continue to pose a risk to online properties. Dyn was just one simple target. What happens if such attacks are made against critical systems?

    Dominion Over Electricity
    Ukraine has already suffered two separate power outages attributed to hackers, the latest in mid December, which affected regions around its capital. Customers were without power for over an hour, as personnel had to manually switch equipment to restore electricity. The attack was largely seen as sending a message, rather than trying to cripple a nation.

    President Obama, in his final press conference of 2016, stated the U.S. is more vulnerable than other potential adversaries:“Our economy is more digitized, it’s more vulnerable, partly because we’re a wealthier nation, and we’re more wired than other nations” – Obama 2016

    Former FBI agent Austin Berglas stated:” A three-pronged attack against our power grid, transportation, and financial systems would be devastating and potentially viewed as a terrorist attack against the United States“.

    Aggregate at Risk
    The United States operates at an extremely high pace with huge efficiencies. We are a modern nation and have crafted our world to move at a dizzying pace where unimaginable systems work together like cogs to turn the engine of our everyday lives. The very foundations of which are now becoming more dependent on computers, data, and the Internet. Our transportation, power, financial systems, healthcare, emergency services, fuel infrastructure, communication networks, food distribution networks, and government services are all reliant in some way on digital technology that can be targeted by attackers.

    Much like the butterfly-effect, situations in one small system may cascade to cause catastrophic impacts elsewhere. Who could have imagined that home cameras and DVR’s left with default passwords, by apathetic consumers, would be the engine used take down huge chunks of the Internet? Yet it did. Sadly, those were not even the nation-state level threats. They were likely just curious hackers looking to experiment with what they ‘could do’. The big players have much more powerful tools in the tool-box, which are designed for greater impact over a longer period of time.

    As we go into 2017, entranced with the glistening of new technology, we must also understand there is a risk that accompanies it, which aggregates and compounds over time. Cybersecurity must play a part in the foundations of every step forward we make.

    Interested in more? Follow me on Twitter (@Matt_Rosenquist), Steemit, and LinkedIn to hear insights and what is going on in cybersecurity.