Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Traditional vs. SoC FPGA Design Flow A Video Pipeline Case Study
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Traditional vs. SoC FPGA Design Flow A Video Pipeline Case Study


Published on

This presentation compares the impact of traditional FPGA engineering design flow to one employed with an SoC FPGA. The two approaches will be contrasted in terms of their impacts on system …

This presentation compares the impact of traditional FPGA engineering design flow to one employed with an SoC FPGA. The two approaches will be contrasted in terms of their impacts on system architecture design, debugging, risk mitigation, system integration, bring-up, feature enhancements, design obsolescence, and engineering effort. A case study is presented that explores these impacts within a video pipeline development effort.

Published in: Engineering, Technology, Business

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. WEBINAR Traditional vs. SoC FPGA Design Flow with A Video Pipeline Case Study May 8, 2014
  • 2. 2 SPEAKERS Allan Dubeau Principal Design Engineer, Nuvation Engineering Todd Koelling Sr. Marketing Manager, SoC Products, Altera Stefan Rosinger Product Manager, CPU, ARM Joseph Xavier Marketing Manager, Nuvation Engineering Moderator:
  • 3. 1. Introductions 2. Compare the impacts of a traditional FPGA engineering design flow to one employing an SoC FPGA, from the perspective of:  ARM and ALTERA design/development  System architecture design  Risk mitigation  System integration & Bring-up  Achieving customer satisfaction through Requirements understanding 3. Case Study: Video pipeline evaluation platform 3 SOC FPGA VS. TRADITIONAL FPGA DESIGN FLOW AGENDA
  • 4.  Established in 1997  Offices in Silicon Valley and Waterloo, Canada  800+ successful projects completed  Clients ranging from start-ups to Fortune-50 companies  Exceptional Engineers and Program Managers  Flexible business models to match customer and market requirements 4 WHO WE ARE COMPANY PROFILE NUVATION SPECIALIZES IN PRODUCT REALIZATION AND CUTTING-EDGE DESIGNS. SUNNYVALE, CA USAWATERLOO, ON CAN
  • 5.  A top-tier Altera Design Services Network partner since 1998, with projects delivered using virtually all device families  Experts with ARM-based microprocessors and SoCs Altera Partner & EDS Provider ARM Connected Community Member WHO WE ARE NUVATION ENGINEERING
  • 6. 6 THE SoC FPGA SoC FPGAs integrate ARM- based processor system with FPGA fabric. Benefits are higher performance, lower power, lower cost, and smaller board space of a single chip solution. After FPGA + CPU Devices Memory Before FPGA Devices Memory CPU Devices Memory
  • 7. Altera Embedded Technology Centers of Excellence 7 Premal Buch VP Engineering San Jose Ty Garibay VP Engineering Austin Technology Center Mark Dickinson VP Engineering Europe Technology Center FPGA IP and Development Tools •FPGA Tools •Qsys •System Console •AXI/Avalon IP interface Embedded IC Design And Software •SoC FPGA IC Design •Embedded Software •Nios II Soft Processsor Embedded System Solutions •Industrial Applications •Automotive Applications •Communications Solutions •Video Processing Embedded Technology Centers of Excellence San Jose HQ Austin Technology Center Europe Technology Center World Class Embedded Team Bringing Customizable SoCs to Market
  • 8. THE ARCHITECTURE FOR THE DIGITAL WORLD® From sensors to servers, ARM designs processor technology that lies at the heart of advanced consumer products
  • 9. Software developme nt tools Physical IP – Design of the building blocks of the chip Processor and Graphics IP – Design of the brain of the chip Power Mgmt Bluetooth Cellular Modem WiFi SIM GPS Flash Controller Touchscreen & Sensor Hub Sensor Hub Camera Apps Processor  Advanced consumer products are incorporating more and more ARM technology – from processor and multimedia IP to software ARM TECHNOLOGY
  • 10. • ARM delivers technology to drive scalable, efficient system- on-chip solutions: – Software increasing system efficiency with optimized software solutions – Diverse components, including CPUs and GPUs designed for specific tasks – Interconnect System IP delivering coherency and the quality of service required for lowest memory bandwidth – Physical IP for a highly optimized processor implementation THE CHIP IS THE SYSTEM
  • 11. ARM and Altera Design/Development: Co-Design and Co-Development 11
  • 12. 12 ARM AND ALTERA DESIGN/DEVELOPMENT: CO-DESIGN AND CO-DEVELOPMENT ARM Development Studio 5 (DS-5) Altera Edition Toolkit Altera USB-Blaster™II Connection
  • 13.  Industry First: FPGA-Adaptive Debugging  Removes debugging barrier between CPUs and FPGA • Synchronizes debug between the FPGA and ARM processor software • Cross-triggering between the HPS and FPGA fabric allows inter-domain synchronization, for instance, to stop all hard and soft processors simultaneously.  Automatic creation of register views of FPGA peripherals • Qsys-generated FPGA peripheral registers definition can be imported into DS-5 Debugger for system register visibility while debugging software 13 ARM AND ALTERA DESIGN/DEVELOPMENT: CO-DESIGN AND CO-DEVELOPMENT ARM® Development Studio 5 (DS-5™) Altera® Edition Toolkit
  • 14. ARM AND ALTERA DESIGN/DEVELOPMENT: CO-DESIGN AND CO-DEVELOPMENT • Customizable data collection to enable system wide optimization OS counters: CPU load, thread wait, network, memory CPU counters, aggregated, per core or cluster: clock cycles, instructions, branch prediction, cache & TLB misses System and custom counters: level2 cache, interconnect, custom metrics Visual annotations: from bitmaps to frame buffers Process/thread heat map: color reflects CPU/GPU activity Text annotations: signal high-level events in the application System-Level Analysis with Streamline Performance Analyzer Capable and Cost Effective Altera USB-Blaster™ II Elaborate ARM DSTREAM
  • 15. System Architecting 15
  • 16. 16 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING  Profiling assessment in relation to a client’s requirements • Initial requirements maybe biased based on pre-conceived feature limitations of bandwidth limitations of external interfaces. • Can be enhanced by removing the bottleneck associated with external multi-chip solutions • The tight integration between the HPS and FPGA fabric provides over 125-Gbps peak bandwidth with integrated data coherency between the processors and the FPGA. • Computation profiling is an available feature of the development tools —Streamline support: Statistical analysis of software load and bus traffic spanning the CPUs and FPGA • Many elements of the hardware and software can be independently developed
  • 17. 17 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING Software Design Flow Hardware Development Software Development Release Release • Quartus II Programmer • In-system Update • Flash Programmer Simulate Simulate • ModelSim,etc. • AMBA-AXI and Avalon bus functional models (BFMs) • Virtual Target Debug Debug • SignalTap™ II logic analyzer • System Console • ARM Development Studio 5 • GNU, Lauterbach •iSystem, SEGGER • Quartus II design software • Qsys system integration tool • Standard RTL flow • Altera and partner IP • ARM Development Studio 5 • GNU tool chain • OS/BSP: Linux, VxWorks • Hardware Libraries • Design Examples Design Design HW/SW Handoff FPGA Design Flow
  • 18. 18 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING HW/SW Design Partitioning Partitioning can be postponed and refined at a later phase of the design process and is not part of the critical path.
  • 19. 19 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING HW/SW Design Partitioning (cont.) The architecture and development flow will lead towards an earlier IDM deployment, effort re-use, as well as a more IDM friendly architecture and deployment strategy.
  • 20. 20 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING  HW/SW design partitioning (cont) • Data coherency maximizes partitioning options — Increase power efficient computing o Co-processing certain tasks in the FPGA fabric can not only benefit from a performance standpoint but also reduces the per power computational element — Decreased and much finer grained latency potentials (do not have to deal with protocol overheads) — Saves on board level debugging — Not I/O restrictive and removes having to commit to a board level CPU to FPGA interface — Expedites board design faster Hard Processor System (HPS) ……. FPGA Shared Multiport DDR SDRAM Controller (2) HPS to FPGA FPGA to HPS FPGA Config.
  • 21.  Monolithic SOC advantages • Does not compromise some of the characteristics of a multi-chip solution —Independent powering —Flexible configuration and boot sequencing • Reduced power, voltage rail requirement, clocking, BOM, layout etc. 21 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING ≡
  • 22. 22 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING  Integrated Hard IP peripherals • Increased performance • Reduces implementation time and cost • Reduces FPGA resource and IP cost requirements —PCIe multi-function support can save around 20K logic elements alone • Can share external DDR memory • FPGA can also access some of the other HPS Hard IP peripherals
  • 23. Risk Mitigation 23
  • 24.  SOC lends itself towards a better step wise development and integration process  Integrated data coherency and non-committal multi-chip interface maximizes functional requirement changes and increased flexibility • Not having to commit to the FPGA and CPU I/O at the board level.  Earlier customer wide deployment taking advantage of both In-the field updates and extended and flexible functional requirement changes and enhancements. 24 RISK MITIGATION
  • 25.  Extends integration and definition of final functionality further along the design process cycle.  More easily adapts to handle unforeseen changes in external requirements or expected signaling behavior.  Reduces initial commitment directly associated to “What-if” scenarios • Can allocate effort only when certain criteria become apparent or are part of critical path.  Based on well-established HW/SW manufacturers and distributor with mature and extensive eco-systems.  With a well established SoC-friendly architecture can increase the abstraction level for easier and faster incorporation of design enhancements as well as test and debug 25 RISK MITIGATION
  • 26. System Integration and Bring-Up 26
  • 27.  Faster and less costly when factoring elements such as; • Board and layout issues between multi-chip interface being eliminated • Using extensive co-verification real-time debugging options  Easier systematic debugging process through incremental and step-wise development • Taking advantage of the Cyclone V SoC ARM core’s computational power.  Can incorporate and leverage on familiar, extensive and powerful Linux based application level for debugging. • The interfaces between many of the hard core periphery and software drivers are mature and can be used as-is without additional debugging 27 SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND BRING-UP
  • 28.  3rd Party example of a HW/SW validation platform from Flexibilis that makes use of an external custom processor environment. Many benefits of this system level solution for validation can be realized and incorporated within the Cyclone V SoC itself. This includes system solutions that would not necessarily populate a processor 28 SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND BRING-UP 3RD PARTY VENDOR EXAMPLE USING CUSTOM HW/SW VALIDATION
  • 29. Achieving Customer Satisfaction through Requirements Understanding 29
  • 30.  Progression milestones that fit with client’s demonstrations and establishes confidence in progress of deliverable(s) • The SoC architecture lends itself to a more incremental functional bring-up process. Initial conceptual functionality and proof of concepts can be implemented using the powerful ARM core and be incorporated as milestones for demonstration purposes. • The FPGA fabric can incorporate “What-if” scenarios for SW corner cases that maybe present in the field and tested in a controlled and observable manner. —example shown on the next slide 30 ACHIEVING CUSTOMER SATISFACTION THROUGH REQUIREMENTS UNDERSTANDING
  • 31. 31  Design for testability (Actual Example) • ARM can be used —to prototype FPGA destined algorithms o developed faster in SW than RTL o can later serve to verify HW with “Golden Test Vectors” • FPGA can create Fault-Insertion Modules to profile and verify SW flow control handling and corner cases ACHIEVING CUSTOMER SATISFACTION THROUGH REQUIREMENTS UNDERSTANDING
  • 32.  Reliability • Apply non-intrusive tasks between both CPU and FPGA —Data and Flow control integrity health monitoring o Many FPGA designs omit this due to the impact on additional resources and development time  A small subset can be implemented on latency sensitive signaling and exposed to SW routines o Software based health monitoring is faster/easier and less resource intensive to implement 32 ACHIEVING CUSTOMER SATISFACTION THROUGH REQUIREMENTS UNDERSTANDING
  • 33. Cyclone V SoC Case Study: A Video Pipeline Evaluation Platform 33
  • 34. 34  Video Pipeline Evaluation Platform  17 Calendar Week Engagement  1600 Eng-Hours (40 Eng-Weeks)  2 FPGA Designs  1 Controller (NIOS II) Software Design Nuvation Design Engagement CYCLONE V SoC CASE STUDY: VIDEO PIPELINE EVALUATION PLATFORM
  • 35. 35 BLOCK DIAGRAM OF FPGA ARCHITECTURE FPGA ‘A’ Board below is the Board that is targeted for the Cyclone V SoC Solution CYCLONE V SoC CASE STUDY: VIDEO PIPELINE EVALUATION PLATFORM
  • 36. 36 ARM AND ALTERA DESIGN/DEVELOPMENT: CO-DESIGN AND CO-DEVELOPMENT Cyclone V SoC  Familiarity with tool chains does not incur any extra engineering time and effort  Allows more flexibility for engineering resourcing  Complex interaction between PC and on-board FPGA ARM controller will benefit from the enhanced Debugging between FPGA fabric and ARM controller  Can utilize Linux and Ethernet interface to develop and debug application SW for both low level and PC interface FPGA only  Embedded OS • PC based Application required both Low-Level and High Level control of FPGA Video Pipeline • NIOS solution posed a problem in Horsepower and required additional time in IDE to nail down requirements • The initial design UI was not ready until the late stages of the design DEVELOPMENT AND DEBUG TOOL CHAIN BASED ON MATURE ECOSYSTEM OF TOOLS FOR BOTH ARM AND ALTERA
  • 37. 37 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING HW/SW DESIGN PARTITIONING Cyclone V SoC  An SoC solution allows some of the implementation details to be optimized during implementation with an initial architecture approach unblocking the development phase of the FPGA. FPGA only  The Initial Design Engagement phase was over 8 engineering weeks of effort spanning an initial 5 week period • There was considerable effort spent on initial architecture due to custom protocol between the PC and on-board NIOS II • The architecture partitioning affected the FPGA implementation and both the Software and Hardware Detailed Design Specifications • Several architecture decisions could not be postponed
  • 38. 38 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING INTEGRATED HARD IP PERIPHERALS (MEMORY) Cyclone V SoC  Cyclone V SoC Hard IP • The design memory bandwidth requirements can utilize a single HPS hard memory controller for ARM program execution and Video Capture storage • The FPGA DDR Pipeline buffer can be accessed by the ARM to implement incremental bring-up  Using hard memory controller reduces implementation and debugging time for both the Calendar and Engineering effort by 2-3 weeks. Details to follow. FPGA only  Design required storage for Video Frame buffering for Video Pipeline and Video Capture controlled by user on Host PC via the NIOS II  Original design necessitated 2 external interfaces and 2 DDR soft cores • Timing closure required a reduction in speed.
  • 39. 39 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING INTEGRATED HARD IP PERIPHERALS (I2C AND SPI) Cyclone V SoC  This solution is available as Hard IP connected directly to the ARM block • Linux access to the I2C and SPI modules — Low level drivers already exist — Functional HW/SW blocks that do not to be debugged — Already available to perform board level tests of the external interfaces • Another example saving — Time and effort costs — FPGA internal resource reduction FPGA only  Original design used FPGA soft core modules in conjunction with the NIOS II to interface with the second FPGA sensor board and configure external HDMI chips. • This also involved Software Driver development work for the NIOS II developer
  • 40. 40 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING INTEGRATED HARD IP PERIPHERALS (USB 2.0/GIGE ETHERNET/CUSTOM) Cyclone V SoC  The Cyclone V SoC GIGE Ethernet interface is a “slam dunk” winner for the client • Reducing complexity and image transfer time to Host PC. • Leverage on existing Linux Ethernet interface connected to the Host PC • Drastically minimize controller software development complexity and custom developed interface to FPGA fabric • Early access for integration and debug FPGA only  Client originally was looking to use USB 2.0 to interface between the host PC and the FPGA system board • The board USB 2.0 was not functional and another means was looked into • GIGE Ethernet was available but the client was concerned with the additional development time + costs + feasibility • Client opted for a Custom Interface using the FPGA GPIO pins and an external board they decided to design themselves.
  • 41. 41 SYSTEM ARCHITECTING FPGA “A” RESOURCE MAPPING INTO CYCLONE V SOC SE FAMILY OFFERING Device Resources 5CSEA2 5CSEA4 5CSEA5 5CSEA6 LEs (K) 25 40 85 110 Adaptive logic modules (ALMs) 9,434 15,094 32,075 41,509 M10K memory blocks 140 224 397 514 M10K memory (Kb) 1,400 2,240 3,972 5,140 MLABs (Kb) 138 220 480 621 18-bit x 19-bit multipliers 72 116 174 224 Variable-precision DSP blocks (1) 36 58 87 112 FPGA PLLs 4 5 6 6 HPS PLLs 3 3 3 3 Maximum FPGA user I/Os 145 145 288 288 Maximum HPS I/Os 188 188 188 188 FPGA hard memory controllers 1 1 1 1 HPS hard memory controllers 1 1 1 1 Processor cores (ARM CortexTM-A9 MPCoreTM) Single/Dual Single/Dual Single/Dual Single/Dual Device Resources FPGA ‘A’ LEs (K) 34 Adaptive logic modules (ALMs) 12,600 M10K memory blocks 90 M10K memory (Kb) 900 MLABs (Kb) 18-bit x 19-bit multipliers 74 Variable-precision DSP blocks (1) 37 FPGA PLLs 2 HPS PLLs 2 Maximum FPGA user I/Os 140 Maximum HPS I/Os 130 FPGA hard memory controllers 1 HPS hard memory controllers 1 Processor cores (ARM CortexTM-A9 MPCoreTM) Single Cyclone V SoC Device Selection OptionsDesign Requirements
  • 42. 42 RISK MITIGATION ..FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENT CHANGES AND ENHANCEMENTS. Cyclone V SoC  Almost all aspects of risk mitigation that we highlighted earlier would be applicable to this project by utilizing a Cyclone V SoC based solution  Image Capture Rate optimization could have more easily been handled in an SoC based solution with the ARM and Linux interface FPGA only  The client wanted to increase the Image Capture Rate transfer to the Host PC system but was limited by initial HW interface selection.
  • 43. 43 RISK MITIGATION Cyclone V SoC  GIGE Ethernet and Linux environment available in a Cyclone V SoC are a “slam dunk” solution. FPGA only  The fact that the USB 2.0 did not work and client opted for a custom interface using 8 bit wide FIFO GPIO with an internally developed custom board design • Added undesirable delays for the client in the overall debugging and development before they were able to use our system as was delivered — Majority of problem was attributed directly to signal integrity issues of the 3rd party custom board design MORE EASILY ADAPTS TO HANDLE UNFORESEEN CHANGES IN EXTERNAL REQUIREMENTS OR EXPECTED SIGNALING BEHAVIOR
  • 44. 44 SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND BRING-UP Cyclone V SoC  We can take advantage of the shared multi-port memory controller to insert and verify video frames  The next few slides make use of a brief “gut feel check” for data rates and throughputs FPGA only  Elements of the Video Pipeline that were difficult to debug • Capture Frame buffer • Corner cases in some of the Video Pipeline Blocks • Auto White Balancing • Sensor Raw Data interface FASTER AND LESS COSTLY WHEN FACTORING ELEMENTS SUCH AS USING EXTENSIVE CO-VERIFICATION REAL-TIME DEBUGGING OPTIONS
  • 46. 46 SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND BRING-UP  Easier systematic debugging process through incremental and step-wise development • Taking advantage of the ARM cores computational power. —The ARM is both powerful and fast enough to implement many of the sub-blocks of the Video Pipelining flow and manipulate the Pipeline Frame buffer o Use reduced video rates when system wide solution utilizes software sub-modules o FPGA sub-blocks all designed to support per module bypass Video Res. 36 bit 32 bit 48 bit Frame Buffer (12 bits / color) (10 bits/ color) (16 bits / color) 1080p60 4.5 Gb/s 4.0 Gb/s 6.0 Gb/s 1080p50 3.7 Gb/s 3.4 Gb/s 5.0 Gb/s 1080p30 2.3 Gb/s 2.0 Gb/s 3.0 Gb/s 1080p25 1.9 Gb/s 1.7 Gb/s 2.5 Gb/s 1080p24 1.8 Gb/s 1.6 Gb/s 2.4 Gb/s 720p60 2.0 Gb/s 1.7 Gb/s 2.7 Gb/s 720p50 1.7 Gb/s 1.5 Gb/s 2.3 Gb/s 720p30 1.0 Gb/s 0.9 Gb/s 1.4 Gb/s
  • 47.  The ARM Hard IP memory interface “Gut Feel Check” for manipulating and sharing the Pipeline Frame Buffer DDR3.  Showing example of 32 bit external interface to DDR3 and sample memory size of 256 MB  The Design can consider Ping Pong buffering schemes  Many decisions are deferred and effort is modular depending on potential bring- up issues, risk mitigation aspects as well as feature demonstration requirements  Example below shows a full frame of video at the lowest rate to be read and written to/from memory in around 6 ms allowing a minimum 26 ms of processing in a 30 fps requirement.  Note – a conservative DDR3 efficiency of 50% is shown whereas 75% is typical 47 SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND BRING-UP Memory Freq. Ext. Width Data Rate Efficiency Shared Access Rate DDR3 MHz Bits 50% 1/2 300 32 19.2 Gb/s 9.6 Gb/s 4.8 Gb/s 400 32 25.6 Gb/s 12.8 Gb/s 6.4 Gb/s Video Res. Pixel Storage Memory Storage Req. Sample Storage 256 MB Bits MB Frames 1080p 48 12.5 20 32 8.3 31 720p 48 5.6 46 32 3.7 69
  • 48. 48 ACHIEVING CUSTOMER SATISFACTION THROUGH REQUIREMENTS UNDERSTANDING Cyclone V SoC  The Cyclone V SoC solution introduced in this sample design would have been an ideal choice platform for this client. Additional and enhanced features could easily have been implemented within committed budgets and timeframes. FPGA only  Nuvation is able to clearly establish and refine client requirements and align our engineering effort and deliverables during the IDE phase.  Some compromises were made early during the IDE phase for both cost and effort. Examples include initial support for HD-SDI and initial implementation of the auto white balance module. We were able to postpone decisions of these modules to the post implementation stages of the design. ELABORATING VIA COHESIVE INITIAL DESIGN ENGAGEMENT PHASE AND ADDING CLARITY TO THE FEATURE REQUIREMENTS
  • 49.  Incorporating trade-offs and benefits from an in-depth understanding of the full system level design process • Time to evaluate our SoC-based solution —We will utilize the metrics directly from our project timetable and effort and make the necessary modifications to where the SoC would impact the schedule —We will utilize this information to directly quantify the impact of an SoC-based solution —The following slides illustrate the evaluation process as it relates to the Design phases of the project 49 SoC FPGA VS TRADITIONAL FPGA DESIGN FLOW: CASE STUDY CONCLUSIONS
  • 50. 50  Quantifying effort at all the various levels of the design process • ARM estimates are compared to the NIOS II actuals columns and actuals are used if the schedule is not directly impacted or has a minimal effect • Estimate imply a potential reduction in both calendar week and engineering hours respectively as; —12 w vs. 17 w = 70% —1111 hrs. vs. 1711 hrs. = 65 % • Estimate reduction of 30 % of Calendar time and 35% Cost SoC FPGA VS TRADITIONAL FPGA DESIGN FLOW: CASE STUDY CONCLUSIONS
  • 51. 51 Cyclone V SoC  FPGA “A” • Engineering hours effort reduction —260 vs. 410 = 63.5% —Soft IP replaced by Hard IP —Emulation modules reduction Cyclone V SoC  Controller NIOS II replaced by embedded ARM • Engineering hours effort reduction —70 vs. 170 = 41% —using GIGE Ethernet —using Linux environment for Development and Host PC interface LEVERAGING ON EXISTING DESIGN EXPERIENCE AND AVAILABLE IP MINIMIZES AND ACHIEVES ESTIMATE METRICS FOR THE DELIVERABLE COSTS AND TIME-FRAMES SoC FPGA VS TRADITIONAL FPGA DESIGN FLOW: CASE STUDY CONCLUSIONS
  • 52. 52 DESIGN FOR TESTABILITY AND RELIABILITY Cyclone V SoC  Inherent part of Nuvation’s design philosophy. The Cyclone V SoC solution reduces engineering effort and calendar time for this particular project as it is the right fit for the desired end product. FPGA only  Made use of development kits  Additional effort involved in FPGA modules implementing test modules • Effort involved is higher using FPGA coding then C-based higher level abstractions CASE STUDY CONCLUSIONS: ON-TIME DELIVERABLES – FIRST TIME RIGHT
  • 53. 53 CLIENT HANDOFF Cyclone V SoC  A working system containing a Cyclone V SoC with the initial low-level design details abstracted will further enable end-users to enable at a much higher programming level the numerous advantages a coherent FPGA/ARM processor has to offer. FPGA only  Deliverables in conjunction with working prototypes allowed the client to use a GUI based interface on a Host PC to completely control the system. The details of the implementation are abstracted. • New commands between the Host and the FPGA system were easily implemented using the NIOS II code headers and recompiling the NIOS II and updating the Flash on the system board — again abstracting the FPGA details SIMPLIFYING AND ABSTRACTING THE MORE COMPLEX FINER GRANULAR COMPONENTS OF COMPLEX SYSTEM DESIGN ELEMENTS
  • 54. 54 Questions? Allan Dubeau Principal Design Engineer, Nuvation Engineering Todd Koelling Sr. Marketing Manager, SoC Products, Altera Stefan Rosinger Product Manager, CPU, ARM
  • 55. 888.669.0828 Silicon Valley Headquarters 151 Gibraltar Court, Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA Waterloo Design Center 332 Marsland Drive, Suite 200, Waterloo, ON N2J 3Z1 Canada