RVN! 26 Banner revised (800 x 100 px) (600 x 100 px)

25 Years of SNUG; 50 Years of Moore’s Law

25 Years of SNUG; 50 Years of Moore’s Law
by Paul McLellan on 03-26-2015 at 8:00 am

Earlier this week it was the Synopsys user group meeting SNUG. Not just any old SNUG but the 25th Annual SNUG. The first one was 15th March 1991 and was attended by 100 people. At the time, Synopsys had annual revenues of $22M. This year, the various SNUGs around the world will have a total attendance of 10,000 people and Synopsys revenue is $2.2B.

Aart de Geus, co-CEO of Synopsys, gave the keynote as usual. Since it was the same Shift Left keynote as he gave earlier at DVCon that Dan already wrote about, I won’t cover it in detail.

See also Shifting Chip Design Left

But as Aart pointed out, there is an even more important anniversary coming up in 28 days (down to 25 now), the 50th anniversary of Moore’s Law. In Electronics Magazine on April 19th 1965 Gordon Moore (at the time still at Fairchild) published an article titledCramming more components onto integrated circuits. Everyone in semiconductors knows what Moore said about doubling of transistors and probably have seen the original graph that he published in the article. What I think is perhaps even more amazing is that the second paragraph of his article said:Integrated circuits will lead to such wonders as home computers…automatic controls for automobiles, and personal portable communications equipment.

Remember, this was 1965. The Beatles were still two years away from putting out Sergeant Pepper. Gordon Moore himself was still 3 years away from founding Intel. Computers filled rooms. Touch-tone phones had not yet been introduced. This was an extraordinary prediction when an integrated circuit did not contain billions of transistors but just 64.

During his keynote, Aart pointed out that he was using the term Moore’s Law in an imprecise sense. I have always liked to use Moore’s Law backwards, namely that the cost of any given functionality implemented in silicon halves every couple of years. That exponential cost reduction means that our smartphones contain much more powerful graphics than a multi-million dollar flight simulator used to.

However, that aspect of Moore’s Law is now broken. Yes, for chips that can make use of it there will be wonderful capabilities at 14/16nm, 10nm, 7nm. Much lower power. Much higher performance. Another factor of 10 in integration. But not lower cost. As FinFet volume manufacturing builds up, perhaps 16nm will eventually be cheaper than 28nm, but for sure not by as much as we have been used to (the rule of thumb used to be twice the number of transistors, 15% increase in wafer cost, so 35% reduction in cost per transistor). That is why so many people are predicting that 28nm will be a very long-lived process. Double patterning (necessary below 28nm) is an impossible additional cost to swallow completely.

One of the new areas of business for Synopsys has been from their Coverity acquisition. One result is that Synopsys have changed the tagline under their logo to From Silicon to Software. Another result of that is that Synopsys themselves have discovered that they have one of the largest code bases around at over 400M lines of code (LoC), around the same number of DNA base-pairs as a mouse. Coverity is about 5% of Synopsys revenue (IP is 25% and the rest is EDA software).

Software development groups are starting to need the same sort of discipline as chip design groups have had for many years. If a chip doesn’t work it costs millions of dollars for a respin, whereas software has a “patch it later” attitude. But as software finds its way into medical devices, cars (not to mention the arrival of IS26262) and, especially, as security moves towards being mission critical, then software has had to adopt similar approaches to quality and testing. After all, what is “fuzzing” apart from another name for “constrained random.”

Aart had 3 lessons from chip design for software:

At the press lunch, Aart talked a bit about IP and how a modern process is simply not viable on its own. It doesn’t just need EDA flows and foundation IP like standard cells and memories. It also needs a portfolio of microprocessors, PCI, USB, DDR and so on. Without it only the largest and most advanced SoC groups can think about doing a design since they will need to design all that IP themselves. As a result Synopsys are working on 10nm IP and FD-SOI IP. They already have lots of 10nm active designs.

Aart reminisced that when he was an undergraduate at school in Switzerland everyone just knew that 1um was the ultimate limit for IC design. Well, that day came and went and we are now at 10nm. We can see about another 10 years ahead today, but then that has pretty much always been the case. It will be interesting to see what comes next.

The SNUG 2015 proceedings page is here.


Innovative MIPI Display Solution for UHD Mobile Devices

Innovative MIPI Display Solution for UHD Mobile Devices
by Pawan Fangaria on 03-25-2015 at 7:00 pm

Today an SoC cannot be without multiple IP blocks integrated together in the most optimal manner. In such an environment, it’s natural that interoperability and configurability of an IP get prime considerations to achieve the best PPA (Power, Performance and Area) for the SoC containing that IP. While PPA is a basic criterion to must achieve, it’s heartening to see IP providers partnering and going beyond PPA to create interoperable solutions that enable next generation technology and devices.

In the modern electronic world, high resolution displays like UHD (Ultra High-Definition) and 4K requires very high bandwidth, of the order of 16Gbps; the bandwidth requirement keeps growing rapidly with higher resolutions. It’s just not possible to keep transmitting video signals at such high bandwidth by using the same old methodology. Synopsysand Hardenthave worked together to develop an innovative Display solution for ultra-high resolution in UHD mobile devices and other next-generation devices utilizing resolution of 4K and beyond. The solution is a combination of Synopsys’ DesignWare MIPI DSI Host Controller IPand D-PHY, and Hardent’s VESA DSC Encoder IP.

To know more about this, I had a phone conversation with Alain Legault, VP of IP products at Hardent. Alain tells me that the effort to establish a DSC standard for ultra-high resolution technology started in Jan 2013 when VESA(Video Electronics Standards Association) setup the DSC Task Group. The DSC 1.1 was released in July 2014 in collaboration with MIPIwho supports DSC (Display Stream Compression) in DSI (Display Serial Interface) 1.2. Hardent has been a member of the DSC Task Group since it began and is the first to come up with the DSC IP. With Synopsys’ MIPI compliant DSI and D-PHY IP,the companies create a complete interoperable Display subsystem.

The DSC solution reduces data transmission bandwidth by compressing and transmitting video signals through existing display interfaces for ultra-high resolution. The DSC IP is fully compliant with DSC 1.1 and enables visually lossless video compression between the application processor and the display module inside a mobile device. It reduces the DSI transmission bandwidth by up to 3x, thus requiring smaller frame buffer and lesser transmission lanes for lower pin count. This clearly reduces cost as well as power consumption and electromagnetic interference (EMI). More information about the DSC IP offering can be obtained from the datasheet here.


[DesignWare DSI Host Controller IP Block Diagram]

Synopsys provides a fully verified and configurable DesignWare MIPI DSI Host Controller IP that is compliant with the latest MIPI AllianceDSI specification v1.2. It supports all commands defined in MIPI Alliance DCS (Display Command Set) and interfaces with MIPI D-PHYs that support the PHY Protocol Interface (PPI). Along with DesignWare MIPI D-PHY, the host controller provides a complete and interoperable display solution that lessens designers’ risks of integrating the MIPI DSI interface into application processors, display bridge ICs and multimedia co-processors. The DesignWare IP supports dual MIPI DSI with VESA DSC 1.1 standard.

Synopsys has been a leading member of MIPI Alliance Display and PHY working groups for several years and has provided MIPI IP with hundreds of design wins to support mobile ecosystem with innovative display interfaces complying with MIPI standards.

On my concern about the quality of the Display subsystem, Alain tells me that it’s visually lossless compression. They experimented with thousands of transmitted video images with and without compression and asked a large group of individuals to participate in a formal test to identify any difference between them; no perceivable difference could be found by the participants between the original and the DSC encoded video images. He says, this solution is scalable to target a required display resolution (4K, 5K or 8K) and provides an ecosystem in the mobile market to offer high-definition devices. Leading SoC vendors have adopted this solution. Silicon products based on this display solution are expected to come in the market by the middle of this year.

This Display solution is fully compliant with MIPI and VESA standards and is highly interoperable. Synopsys and Hardent jointly announced the availability of this new solution for next-generation displays in the MIPI Alliance’s open day in Seattle. Read the press release here.


Chips and pins and layers within

Chips and pins and layers within
by Don Dingee on 03-25-2015 at 3:00 pm

After teams sweat the details of SoC and industrial design, they turn to printed circuit board designers for magic. Here are a pile of chips and passives, and a schematic for interconnecting them. This is how much physical space the board can occupy. Connectors have to be here, and here, and mounting holes there, and there. There are a few constraints in power domains, signal routing, and thermal hotspots to worry about. From that point, skilled PCB layout artists create and cross check the layout, and the Gerber files go off to the board house for fabrication. Continue reading “Chips and pins and layers within”


The Apple A9 Samsung & TSMC Love Triangle

The Apple A9 Samsung & TSMC Love Triangle
by Robert Maire on 03-25-2015 at 10:00 am

The Apple A9 drama continues to play out with no certainty!
At the end of the day does it matter?
Will the winner be the loser?
A Comedy, Tragedy or Love Story?
Depends on your view…

Act I Scene I…The stage is set….

We are watching an Italian Opera of a standard love triangle….
The object of desire is the rich and beautiful Princess Iphonia Applelina being pursued by Prince Don Samsune and Count Don Tsemcee. Each is trying to prove their love for the princess. There are rumors swirling around about whom the princess has secretly promised her love and fortune to. The respective villages of the two suitors are both claiming that their nobleman is the one and true love of the princess whose heart has been betrothed to him.

The plot is further complicated by the young and sexy Countess Snap Dragonee from Qualcomia who is trying to steal away both suitors with her charms. In the background, the mysterious Arabian merchant Glabal Faadhil is hoping to have an affair with the princess so that he may get some of the leftovers of her fortunes. Meanwhile the princess has said nothing publicly except that the Crown Ball for her engagement party will be in the fall of the year but no one yet knows who will be on her ARM for the affair. The opera is full of the standard bit players of servants and interested parties who all have an axe to grind and an interest in the outcome. The endless rumor mongering of an opera is at full farce…..

How will this end?
Who will win? and who will lose?
The fat lady has yet to sing……

We still don’t know & we wouldn’t trade on it
We have been back and forth with the trade “rags” in Taiwan and Korea each claiming victory for the local team. This volley started months ago and its still likely too early to tell for sure. Now the latest rumor is that yield issues at Samsung has pushed business in the direction of TSMC. We don’t understand how this is new news as we have been very publicly talking about disappointing yields at Samsung for months now and how it doesn’t make either mathematical of financial sense given the current yields we have heard about.

Analysts are out there touting this as incremental information. Additionally its unclear that no matter what the financial arrangement that Apple would risk the iPhone 6S roll out on unstable process and poor yields. Is the A9 business really fungible?

The reality is that the Samsung 14nm process and the TSMC 16nm process flows are pretty far apart. The TSMC process is much more conservative and more like a warmed over 20nm design with FinFET rather than a full on new process which is closer to the Samsung description. Its not as if the business can be switched back and forth at the drop of a hat. As we have said in the past, Apple could “tape out” two designs, one for Samsung and one for TSMC and follow through to the end but obviously that’s a lot of work. They already have to tape out two designs, one for the A9 and one for the A9X (the Ipad processor) so we would really be talking about 4 potential designs.

Its likely a zero sum game

There is only so much foundry capacity in the world to go around at the leading edge. If it isn’t used for Apple its going to get used for Qualcomm or others. Whoever doesn’t win the Apple business will get Qualcomm’s business, which as far as I can see is not all that shabby.

This is much like all the speculation on Wall Street as to who won the DRAM contract for which phone and which device. In memory there is contract and spot pricing. Though its always nice to have a “locked in” contract , the reality is that the spot market is more profitable over the longer term as contracts are at a substantial discount to the spot market. So, are the DRAM contract winners really the stocks I should buy??

Will the winner be the loser?
Is the winner of Apple’s A9 business the real loser? Given the pricing we would expect and the way Apple treats its suppliers we think we know the answer to that question. So what does the winner get? Bragging rights? You can’t pay the rent or buy new chip tools with bragging rights. Investors seem to want to buy whomever wins the A9 business or whomever wins the DRAM contract but maybe they are buying the real loser in terms of financial performance. Spending this amount of time, ink and internet bandwidth over who has won what percentage of Apple’s business is not as productive nor as accurate a predictor of who the financial winner is or what the stock will be 6 months or a year from now.

Apple’s the real winner here…
Apple is playing its suppliers like a Stradivarius. We wonder when Apple will have its suppliers paying them to supply them parts. Much like the princess, Apple can lead both suitors on ad nauseam. They will kill one another to get to yield faster at better pricing. We wouldn’t cry for Qualcomm either as they get the benefit of Apple pushing the envelope so hard and can fall under Apple’s pricing and technology umbrella.

More like a TV soap opera…..

Whereas a real opera has some sort of an end, even though many end unrequited, this opera will go on almost forever. We will hear daily and weekly updates on the the dalliances of the players and it won’t end when the A9 winner is chosen because then we will have the A10 and A11 and on and on… This is going to be syndicated into endless reruns.

The stocks
!
To be clear, we think that its near impossible to draw a very strong correlation between who wins what contract and the stock price. While it may lift revenues and bragging rights, its unclear as to the benefit to the bottom line. As we had mentioned in a previous note we thought that winning a bigger slice of the A9 pie could cause Samsung to choke on it when the semiconductor business is the only one making money there.

Also read: TSMC 2015 Technology Symposium

We continue to think that TSMC has played the smarter game in dealing with Apple and appears to be playing a more predictable, conservative game and remains very, very focused on the bottom line. For the equipment companies we could yet see a sudden rush of orders once the fat lady sings and one of the players actually has to produce the A9 in volume to make the iPhone 6S Crown Ball in the fall of this year. Until there is more clarity, we wouldn’t jerk around our portfolio based upon the rumor du jour as to who has what A9 business or it could wind up as a tragedy……..

Bravo!! Bravo!!

By Robert Maire
Semiconductor Advisors LLC




TSMC 2015 Technology Symposium

TSMC 2015 Technology Symposium
by Paul McLellan on 03-25-2015 at 7:00 am


This year’s North American TSMC Technology Symposium is fast approaching. There are three, starting in Silicon Valley.

  • San Jose on Tuesday April 7th at the San Jose Convention Center
  • Boston on Tuesday April 14th at the Burlington Marriott
  • Austin on Thursday April 16th at the downtown Hilton

The symposium will also take place in Shanghai (date tbd), Hsinchu (tbd), Amsterdam (6/16), Herzliya (6/29), Yokohama (tbd).

Another save-the-date to put on your calendar is the 2015 TSMC OIP Ecosystem Forum which will take place in Santa Clara on 17th September.

What will you hear about if you attend? The current status of all things TSMC and roadmaps for the future. In more detail:

  • update on TSMC’s processes including 16FF+, progress at 10nm, to infinity and beyond
  • specialty technology portfolio including image sensor, embedded flash, power IC, MEMS, and the ultra-low-power ULP processes
  • GIGAFAB ramping capabilities and plans
  • advanced backend technologies including CoWoS, InFO and more
  • OIP (open innovation platform) EDA and IP ecosystem: 16FF+ and 10FF status

Of course, if you are going to attend, you should go all day. But the program for the day (at all 3 locations) is:

  • 8.30 onwards: registration is open
  • 9.35 to 9.50: welcome remarks (Rick Cassidy, President TSMC America)
  • 9.50 to 10.30: industry overview and corporate update (Mark Liu, co-CEO)
  • 10.30 to 10.50: coffee (and ecosystem pavilion will be open)
  • 10.50 to 11.20: technology leadership
  • 11.20 to 11.40: design solution and enablement
  • 11.40 to 12.10: manufacturing excellence
  • 12.10 to 13.10: lunch (and ecosystem pavilion will be open)
  • 13.10 to 14.10: advanced technology updates
  • 14.10 to 14.40: design enablement, flows and services
  • 14.40 to 15.10: coffee (and ecosystem pavilion will be open)
  • 15.10 to 16.10: specialty technology updates
  • 16.10 to 16.40: advanced backend technology
  • 16.40 to 17.30: social hour in the ecosystem pavilion

I will be there. The reason that I think you should be too (assuming you work with TSMC) is that this is one of the very few occasions during the year where you will hear senior TSMC executives talk about their future direction and current status. It is much more compelling, for example, to hear the head of TSMC’s manufacturing talking about fab ramp plans or to hear about 10nm from the head of the organization responsible for developing the process than it is to read a dry press release later in the year.


You can register for the technology symposium here.

“The future of the semiconductor industry is promising with many growth opportunities ahead. To capture these opportunities, we need to continue to work as a collaborative innovation force. Together, we will help each other grow business and stay competitive. This vision is the foundation for the TSMC Grand Alliance. At TSMC, customers are always at the center of all our efforts. With this spirit, TSMC has become our customers’ TRUSTED technology and capacity provider along the way.”


Apple’s ARMed History

Apple’s ARMed History
by Majeed Ahmad on 03-24-2015 at 7:00 pm

Apple has redefined three industries within a decade: media player with the iPod, mobile handset with the iPhone and portable computers with the iPad. If there is anything common in these three game-changing product development stories other than Apple, it’s the ARM footprint. Even now the technology media is abuzz with speculation that Apple could eventually replace Intel’s x86 chips in Macs with ARM SoCs.

In retrospect, Apple’s association with ARM goes far beyond the iPod/iPhone/iPad success stories, right up to the foundation of the British technology icon. In many ways, it was Apple who had put ARM on the semiconductor industry map. It’s a fascinating tale of technology collaboration that was born out of specific design needs of the Cupertino, California–based computer firm.


Search for a specialized processor for Newton led to the creation of ARM

During the late 1980s, Apple was looking for a suitable mobile processor for its upcoming PDA that came to be known to the world as Newton. Here, Apple’s fab partner VLSI Technology led the computer maker to a small firm in Cambridge, England that owned a low-power and high-efficiency processor. Acorn Computers, also a PC maker, had developed its own processor because it didn’t want to buy expensive PC processors from Intel or Motorola.

However, Acorn didn’t have deep pockets to develop a complex and powerful processor, so it ended up with a RISC-based device carrying a simple structure. They called it Acorn RISC Machine or ARM. In VLSI, which manufactured these PC processors for Acorn, it was John Stockton who had told the Newton team about the ARM processor. Eventually, Apple’s chief scientist Larry Tessler made the case for using ARM processors in the Newton PDA.


John Stockton showed the Newton design team way to ARM processors
(Photo: Mayfield)


The Birth of ARM

Now Apple wanted to make some tweaks in the original ARM processor to suit the needs of Newton and Acorn didn’t have the budget to carry out these changes on its own. In fall 1990, in a span of six weeks, a joint venture was negotiated between Apple, VLSI Technology and Acorn. Acorn would provide the manpower, Apple Computers would bring the financial support and VLSI Technology would share the design tools technology.

On November 27, 1990, Acorn joined hands with Apple and VLSI to jointly create a new company that changed its name from “Acorn RISC Machine” to “Advanced RISC Machine.” Robin Saxby officially launched Advanced RISC Machines or ARM with the goal to address and attack the growing market for low-cost, low-power, high-performance 32-bit RISC chips. Apple, who had persuaded Acorn to make the ARM platform independent, took a 43 percent stake in the new company for US$3 million.

Apple began using the first generation of mobile ARM chips in its Newton Message Pad launched the 1993. In addition to supplying chips to Apple and Acorn, ARM began licensing the rights to manufacture its chip designs as well as offering an architectural license to technology firms interested in incorporating and modifying ARM’s core technologies into their custom chip designs. ARM quickly became the de facto standard for embedded and mobile chip designs. The rest, as they say, is history.

As a small footnote, it’d be worthwhile to mention that ARM returned the favor by providing a much-needed stream of cash to Apple during its bleak days in the late 1990s. From 1998 to 2003, Apple sold its shares in ARM for an estimated US$1.1 billion, the cash infusion that helped Jobs to finance new projects and rebuild the beleaguered computer maker. In the hindsight, Apple’s investment in ARM went on to pay huge dividends as the Cupertino, California–based technology company branched out into portable devices like the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad.

Majeed Ahmad is author of books Smartphone: Mobile Revolution at the Crossroads of Communications, Computing and Consumer Electronicsand The Next Web of 50 Billion Devices: Mobile Internet’s Past, Present and Future.


This Market worth $1,465.62M by 2020!!

This Market worth $1,465.62M by 2020!!
by Eric Esteve on 03-24-2015 at 10:52 am

This is exactly what you will never see in IPnest surveys (and written in Semiwiki):“Advanced Process Control Market worth $1,465.62 Million by 2020” …sorry for you if you like very precise figure (like $ 1, 465.62 million) but you will NEVER see such insane forecast in any of our surveys or blogs. Building a forecast is a difficult exercise, essentially based on assumptions (except if you have bought a crystal ball) and we will list the reasons why it’s far to be easy- and can’t be precise at 1/100, 000.

Before even thinking about building this forecast, you need to make a market size evaluation (as precise as possible, say at less than 1 %). In certain cases, you simply can’t access to these data, but let’s imagine that you can do it. Then, you propose a snapshot of the market status as of today (in fact, last year). If you have been rigorous, this market view will be useful for the various actors, suppliers, customers or acting in support functions to this market. You can find below a good example of a well-done job: ranking of the Semiconductor Top 20 in 2014 by IC Insights:

Even if such a ranking from independent analyst is very useful, customers will more likely ask for a forecast, usually 5 years long. At this point, you are leaving the comfortable, rational area to enter into “forward looking” type of analysis. I mean that you have to think in term of assumptions, not actual data. When you are doing a serious job, such assumptions are comforted by a deep knowledge of the specific market you are reviewing. Let’s add a few insights coming from key actors and private discussions held with some people (from your network). In fact, assumptions are only to be used after making an exhaustive review of the market under review, starting from the above table if you plan to forecast the semi market for example. One option can be to segment this market into high-end, mainstream and low-end segments or into analog, memory, processor and logic segments. Splitting to better evaluate each of these segments as the market dynamics will be different from one segment to another.

At this point of time you can start using forecast maker’s best friend: Excel spreadsheet. If your assumptions are based on rational, if you don’t make any mistake when turning it into formulas, pushing Excel button will give you results that you may organize into nice curves or table and print. By the way, don’t forget to check if the result at 1 year makes sense (and rethink the whole process if it doesn’t, identify why and correct). Once you think your forecast is solid and you come to a result you can share with customers or partner (or with your boss), PLEASE don’t print figures with 8 digit precision! This is simply NON-scientific; anybody having passed a degree in physics should know that the final precision when giving a result is always less than the weakest part of the equation. In this case, the precision linked with your assumptions…

Every time I see such results for a 5 years forecast (1, 465.62 million), my first reaction is to think that the person who has built this forecast is just… non-scientist, and I strongly doubt about the results accuracy.

PS: in 2009 IPnest has built the first 5 years forecast for the “Interface IP Market”, see above. In 2008, this market was weighting $240 million, and the forecast for 2013 was $425 million. If I am ashamed when looking at the syntax or the way this first survey is organized, I am very proud when realizing today that the 2013 actual market result is accurate by less than 5% with the forecasted market size in 2009…

PPS: For 2020, IPnest is predicting the Interface IP market to weight $820 million (not K$ 820, 150.17)… see you in 5 years.

From Eric Esteve from IPNEST


A Brief History of Kilopass

A Brief History of Kilopass
by Paul McLellan on 03-24-2015 at 7:00 am

Kilopass was founded back in 2001 by Jack Peng, whose background was in FPGAs with his most recent position being manager of technology development at Actel (now part of Microsemi). The idea was to build a company making one-time-programmable (OTP) memories using anti-fuse technology. Fuses in home-wiring (OK, I know, we all have circuit-breakers these days) work by melting metal and thus breaking the circuit. Anti-fuses work by punching a hole in the gate-oxide using a high voltage and thus making the circuit. Anti-fuses had been around for a long time. In fact I remember in 1988 at VLSI Technology when we started building anti-fuse devices for Quicklogic. Actel also had anti-fuse FPGAs.

The problem with the old approach to anti-fuse is that the comparatively thick gate-oxide and the high voltage required for programming necessitated a non-standard process. What Dr Peng realized was that at 180nm it would be possible to build anti-fuse devices on standard CMOS logic since the gate-oxide breakdown voltage (for programming) was less than the junction breakdown. The higher voltage needed for programming could be generated entirely on-chip.

In the early days of Kilopass, one of the challenges was that customers and foundries were not completely convinced that this approach was not going to cause reliability issues. It really took about 5 years before they got strong customer traction.

The basic idea has not changed since founding, although of course the memory cells have got smaller as they have ridden the technology wave down through process nodes as you would expect. Kilopass is an IP company. They do not manufacture OTP memories but rather they license their technology to companies to incorporate OTP registers or memories onto their SoCs.

I talked to Linh Hong, who is one of the longest serving employees at Kilopass and currently VP sales. She joined as the company in 2006 as it closed its series-C funding and was starting to achieve design-ins. Eight years ago they had around 30 customers, now they have somewhere between 150 and 200.

Today Kilopass is still an IP company supplying OTP memories as both sizable memories and as small register files. It has foundry support at TSMC from 180nm with 16nm in development. SMIC from 180nm with 20nm in development. GF from 130nm down to 14nm in development. UMC from 130nm with 28nm in development. And processes from Jazz, IBM, Grace and Dongbu Hitek. Full process grid is here.


Looking on the net I came across a quote from Charles Ng, who coincidentally used to work with me me at VLSI/Compass. He was the VP sales and marketing for Kilopass in its early days. He described their business back then:Kilopass is an IP Supplier of field programmable memory. You can program the memory content. It is an IP embedded in a SoC. Non-volatile memory means that data content is kept after the power is off. Our claim to fame is that we require only standard logic CMOS process without any additional processing at all. Volatile memory requires a complicated process which is very expensive to develop and to use.

The only thing that you might add today is to emphasize that in the current security environment, anti-fuse has another great attribute. It is basically impossible to “read” the value programmed into the OTP memory even with scanning-electron-microscopes and similar tools.

But today, when venture capitalists do little but talk about “pivoting” and “getting to plan B”, it is interesting to see just how a company can successfully keep the same value proposition for over a decade and build it up into a sizable business.

There is a page on the Kilopass website that lists the company’s chronology here.


Kilopass are having an open house on Thursday April 2nd from 11.45am to 2pm (so there is such a thing as a free lunch) at their new offices at 2895 Zanker Road, San Jose. If you will be attending then RSVP here.


Semiconductors off to slow start in 2015

Semiconductors off to slow start in 2015
by Bill Jewell on 03-23-2015 at 4:30 pm

A weak first quarter outlook for the semiconductor market is indicating a slow start to 2015. Intel recently lowered the midpoint of its 1Q 2015 revenue guidance from $13.7 billion (down 7% from 4Q 2014) to $12.8 billion (down 13%). The table below shows the estimated top 25 semiconductor companies revenue change for 4Q 2014 versus 3Q14 and revenue guidance for 1Q 2015 versus 4Q 2014. Of the 23 companies providing guidance for 1Q 2015, only four (Infineon, Freescale, Analog Devices and Maxim) expect positive change from 4Q 2014. Five companies expect double digit declines (Intel, MediaTek, SanDisk, AMD and ROHM). Some of the reasons cited for the sluggish outlook are weak business PC demand (Intel), excess inventory in the channel (AMD and SanDisk), limited supply due to technology transitions (Micron), a smartphone market transition (MediaTek), and uncertainty in electronic markets and exchange rates (ROHM).

The average guidance is a 5.1% decline. The revenue-weighted average is minus 7.5%. Using the high end of each company’s revenue guidance for 1Q 2015 results in a revenue-weighted average minus 5.0%. Over the last five years, the semiconductor market 1[SUP]st[/SUP] quarter change from the prior 4[SUP]th[/SUP] quarter has ranged from a 3.7% increase to a 5.1% decline, averaging minus 1.0%. The market could potentially experience the worst 1[SUP]st[/SUP] quarter decline since minus 16% in 1Q 2009 during the last major semiconductor downturn.

The outlook for the full year 2015 is varied. Forecasts since January fall into two general ranges: 3.4% to 5.4% (Gartner, IDC, GMR Data, and WSTS) and 7.0% to 9.5% (VLSI Research, IC Insights, Future Horizons, Mike Cowan and SC-IQ). The announced forecasts for 2016 range from 3.1% (WSTS) to 7% (our Semiconductor Intelligence or SC-IQ forecast). In December 2014, our SC-IQ forecast was 11% for 2015 and 7% for 2016. We have revised downward our expected growth for 2015 to 8% based on the projected weak 1Q 2015. We are keeping the 7% forecast for 2016.


Key assumptions are supporting healthy growth in 2015 and 2016 as shown in the table below. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects accelerating World GDP growth in 2015 and 2016. Gartner is forecasting accelerating growth in the combination of PC and tablet units. One area of concern is slowing growth rates for mobile phones and smartphones. Gartner expects total mobile phone unit shipment growth to pick up to 3.7% in 2015 from 1.7% in 2014, but slow to 3.3% in 2016. eMarketer projects slowing growth rates in smartphone users, from 25% in 2014 to 17% in 2015 and 13% in 2014.

[TABLE]
|-
| style=”width: 191px; height: 26px” | Annual Change
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 2014
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 2015
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 2016
| style=”width: 178px; height: 26px” | Source
|-
| style=”width: 191px; height: 26px” | World GDP
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 3.3%
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 3.5%
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 3.7%
| style=”width: 178px; height: 26px” | IMF, Jan.
|-
| style=”width: 191px; height: 26px” | PC + Tablet units
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 1.8%
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 3.7%
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 6.9%
| style=”width: 178px; height: 26px” | Gartner, Jan.
|-
| style=”width: 191px; height: 26px” | Total mobile phone units
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 1.7%
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 3.7%
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 3.3%
| style=”width: 178px; height: 26px” | Gartner, Jan.
|-
| style=”width: 191px; height: 26px” | Smartphone users
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 25%
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 17%
| style=”width: 77px; height: 26px” | 13%
| style=”width: 178px; height: 26px” | eMarketer, Dec. 2014
|-

Our forecast assumes solid growth for the key drivers of the semiconductor industry over the next few years. The trend from 9.9% in 2014 to 8% in 2015 and 7% in 2016 assumes moderating growth of some key drivers such as smartphones. Barring an economic downturn, the semiconductor market should experience average growth around 6% annually through the end of the decade.


Open Source Software Platform Fuels Automotive Innovation

Open Source Software Platform Fuels Automotive Innovation
by Pawan Fangaria on 03-23-2015 at 1:00 pm

These days, most of the innovative concepts in our cars are driven by electronics; not only infotainment systems, but also instrument clusters, safety systems including ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance Systems), information displays, night vision, airbags, backup camera, stability control, and so on. The upcoming connected automobile ecosystem will provide the ultimate in automation and connectedness; your car can have all electronic components inside it connected with each other along with your smartphone and also with the outside world including the cloud and other cars. This kind of automation in connectivity of the automotive systems is possible only through the embedded software which is sitting on top of the smart SoCs employed in the electronic hardware of your vehicle.

In the near future, the software in a high-end vehicle can measure up to a hundred million lines of code. An interoperable and connected ecosystem of such a large software base in the vehicles can be best managed through an open standard where a large contribution from the open source developers around the world can be obtained. GENIVIis a non-profit consortium of automakers who contribute in building and sharing a Linux-based, in-vehicle infotainment (IVI) platform. Today, Linux has evolved as a network OS and is the most cost effective.


[GENIVI Software Architecture]

GENIVI’s aim is form a universal standard platform for all its members by ensuring compliance of open source middleware which can be freely shared among all. The members can add their own differentiation at the application level. Fordhas released its AppLink propriety source code and platform through GENIVI Alliance that complements the open source IVI platform with a proven framework to interact with smartphone and tablet applications. A car’s software can be upgraded just like an smartphone’s to keep it up-to-date for the long lifespan of the car. Of course, there is a larger need to address some of the specific issues such as security over the Controller Area Network (CAN).

As different types of electronics, for example, entertainment and safety get added into a vehicle, the complexity of hardware, software and connectivity grows because they have different levels of functionality and criticality. A high-end car today can have up to a hundred ECUs (Electronic Control Units). The processing required to manage such a large connected system requires a full-fledged automotive operating system; Linux with numerous capabilities in its middleware is promising to provide that level of OS support.


[Mentor’s hypervisor running on top of Mentor’s XSe AXSB hardware reference design]

Combining Linux with a safety certified RTOS on a hypervisor can enable a mixed-criticality single software platform and also reduce cost through module consolidation. In the above picture, MentorEmbedded Hypervisor is hosting two operating systems; the first is Mentor’s XSe OPTstack and XSe SuperBSP used for Linux based IVI systems, and the second is Mentor’s Nucleus RTOS to support safety systems. This is a proof-of-concept for bringing together a number of operating systems on a single platform to support multiple software applications with different levels of criticalities. For security, SELinux (Security Enhanced Linux) can be used for connected vehicles. The module consolidation is also assisted by standardization brought by AUTOSAR (Automotive Open System Architecture) consortium for various automotive software architectures.

Mentor’s Linux solution also brings XSe XStrace and Sourcery Analyzer into the fold that allow developers to look deep inside complex multi-core systems, see what’s happening in real time and troubleshoot like never before.

For a vehicle’s communication to outside world, there are V2V (Vehicle-to-Vehicle) and V2I (Vehicle-to-Infrastructure) technologies. V2V allows vehicles to communicate with each other using short-range radio exchanging data such as traffic congestion, weather condition, construction zones, and so on. It uses the unlicensed 5.9 GHz band which is used for Wi-Fitoo. Consortiums like GENIVI will need to ensure that V2V and V2I are also built around universal standards that are accepted throughout the automotive industry.

By using Mentor’s XSe AXSB reference board as a hardware platform along with the corresponding XSe OPTstack and XSe SuperBSP software platform, vehicle manufactures can start early development to effectively collaborate with Tier-1 supply chain.

An overview of Mentor’s Automotive Technology Platform which is based on GENIVI compliant Linux platform can be seen here. It’s also instrumented from kernel to graphics layer to deliver high performance graphics. As a Board Member of GENIVI, Mentor brings the experience necessary for the successful adoption of open source software by automotive tier-1 suppliers and OEMs.

The Automotive Technology Platform is available on the latest reference boards from Renesas, Texas Instruments, and Freescale. Mentor has an extensive partner network of software vendors, semiconductor companies and industry associations.