Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems (AHS'14) - The 3D FlexTiles Concept

www.flextiles.eu
FlexTiles
3-D Stacked Chip Technology and Strategies for
Optimal Usage of Through Silicon Vias (TSV)
Romain LEMAIRE, CEA-LETI
2014 NASA/ESA Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems (AHS-2014)
FlexTiles Workshop – July 18th, 2014

2 / 27
TheinformationcontainedinthisdocumentandanyattachmentsarethepropertyofFlexTilesconsortium.Youareherebynotifiedthatanyreview,dissemination,distribution,
copyingorotherwiseuseofthisdocumentmustbedoneinaccordancewiththeCAoftheproject(TRT/DJ/624412785.2011).Templateversion1.0
© CEA. All rights reserved – R. LEMAIRE – AHS-2014
Introduction: FlexTiles Architecture
FlexTiles: an innovative manycore architecture based on reconfigurable
devices (FPGAs), DSPs and GPPs
FlexTiles combines advantages:
Programmability from General-Purpose Processors (GPP)
Power efficiency from DSP and hardware accelerator mapped on FPGA
Flexibility from reconfigurable logic
Concept of tiles supported by a software virtualization layer
Accelerator Interfaces to provide homogeneous
access to DSP and hardware accelerators
Flexibility to connect GPP nodes to several
accelerators
How to organize the architecture
at physical level?
GPP Node
AI
DSP FPGA Fabric
NI
GPP Node
NI
NoC
NI NI NI
AI AI
NI
Reconfig. Ctrl.
DDR Node
NI
Tile Tile
GPP Node
NI
I/O
NI
HW Acc. HW Acc.AI
Accelerator Interface
Interpret requests from GPP
NI
Network Interface
Interfaces a node with NoC

3 / 27
Introduction: Motivation for 3D Integration
Which floorplanning strategy for FlexTiles architecture?
Pattern mixing GPP, DSP and FPGA nodes?
Strong constraints on topology
Fixed hardware accelerator granularity
FPGA fabric adjacent to a manycore area
Non-uniform access, long wires
Possible congestion due to limited bisection bandwidth
FlexTiles proposition
3D-stacking approach
Shorter access and flexibility to associate GPP with
hardware accelerators (resource sharing)
Different technologies on separate dies
What can we expect from 3D technologies?
How to refine the 3D-stacking design?
GPP
DSP
FPGA GPP
FPGA GPP
DSP
FPGA
GPP
GPP
FPGA
GPP
GPP
DSP
GPP
GPP FPGA
GPP
DSP

4 / 27
Outline
3D technologies available for FlexTiles
Architecture partitioning for 3D integration
FlexTiles 3D-stacked IC Definition
3D integration evaluation and results
Conclusion and future works

5 / 27
3D IC: Some Definitions
3D-IC chip stacking:
Adding a new vertical interconnect chain in CMOS :
Through Silicon Via (TSV) + microbump
(Backside micro-
bump)
(bump)
BEOL: Back-End-Of-Line
FEOL: Front-End-Of-Line

6 / 27
TSV Technologies
Via First TSV (Polysilicon filled)
AR 20,
5x100µmProcessed before CMOS front-end steps
Pitch: ~10µm
Density: 10000 TSV/mm²
SOI substrate, High-voltage
AR 7,
2 x 15µm
Via Middle TSV (Copper filled)
AR 10,
10x100µm
Processed after CMOS front-end steps
Pitch: 40µm to 50µm
Best flexibility in layout and design
Higher density of I/Os
Via Last TSV (Copper liner)
AR 1,
80x80µm
AR 2,
60x120µm
AR 3,
40x120µm
Processed after metallization
Pitch: ~100µm
Minimal impact on circuit layout
3 families of TSV’s with different characteristics

7 / 27
Die Connection Technologies
Pitch
Classic Flip chip
(Ball or stud bump)
> 100 µm
TSV last
Cu pillars
(microbump)
100-30 µm range
TSV middle
Cu-Cu Direct bonding
Si
Si
Cu
SiO2
Si
Si
Cu
SiO2
Need very flat surface
Cleaning
Down to 5 µm30-10 µm range
TSV first
Top chip
Bottom chip

8 / 27
3D IC: Stacking Strategies
Source: Patrick Leduc; D43D 2011

9 / 27
3D-IC: Stacking Options
Face-to-Face:
Inter-die connection:
TSV are not required
Package connection:
TSV are required to propagate
the I/Os
Face-to-Back:
Inter-die connection:
TSV are required
Package connection:
Flip-chip
BULK
METAL LAYERS
PACKAGE
PACKAGE
BULK
METAL LAYERS
BULK
METAL LAYERS
TSVs
TSVs
Micro-bumps
Bumps
Bumps
BULK
METAL LAYERS
Micro-bumps

10 / 27
3D Technologies for FlexTiles
Summary of technology selection for FlexTiles
Via-middle TSV
Technology more mature in manufacturing process
Valuable trade-off concerning density of integration compared to technological
complexity
Copper pillar (microbump) for binding
Aligned with via-middle TSV technology
Wafer to wafer assembly if same die size
Stacking Face-to-face or Face-to-back to be decided base on
design exploration results

11 / 27
Outline

12 / 27
3D Partitioning Options
How to partition the architecture over the different layers?
Coarse-grained: placing large functional blocks (IP cores) on
different layers in the 3D stack. Interactions/Communications
between IPs define their relative position in the 3D stack.
Medium-grained: placing the functional units of an IP core on
different layers to take advantage of shorter 3D connections.
Fine-grained: placing the gates composing the same functional
unit on different layers.
Solution for FlexTiles : coarse-grained
IP cores can be reused
Impact of 3D technologies is restricted to inter-die
communications
Integration of different technologies (Manycore / FPGA)

13 / 27
FlexTiles Partitioned Architecture
The FPGA fabric is not fractioned
Resources connected to the NoC by Network Interfaces
Die-to-die connection are supported by 3D NoC links
NoC
NIDDR Node I/ONINI
GPP
node
DSP
node
NI
AI
AI AI
DSP
node
NI
AI
NI
GPP
node
NI
GPP
node
Reconfig. Ctrl.
Manycore
Layer
Reconfigurable
Layer
TOPBOTTOM
NI
NINI
FPGA FabricHW acc. HW acc.
3Dlink
eFPGA
3Dlink
NI
3Dlink

14 / 27
Solving Partitioning Issues
GALS approach for synchronization
Clock synchronization is a critical problem (propagation delays balancing)
Globally Asynchronous Locally Synchronous (GALS) approach
Several domains with independent clock signals
Possibility of dynamic frequency scaling
Advantages for FlexTiles architecture
Avoid to merge clock domains between manycore
and reconfigurable layers
No need for multi-techno, multi-die clock tree
synthesis tools (not currently well-mature)
3D NoC infrastructure for communication
NoC proposed in FlexTiles as communication
infrastructure for scalability and flexibility reasons
NoC also well-adapted for 3D GALS system
3D NoC built as a regular 3D-mesh
7-port NoC router decomposed into 5-port (intra-die) and 4-port (vertical) routers

15 / 27
Outline

16 / 27
FlexTiles architecture organization based on 3D-stacked
layers:
Manycore structure layer (GPP and/or DSP nodes)
Reconfigurable layer (FPGA fabric)
3 products are targeted
1. Homogeneous manycore layer (GPP nodes) coupled with reconfigurable layer.
2. Homogeneous manycore layer (GPP nodes) coupled with a full DSP node
layer.
3. Heterogeneous manycore layer with both GPP and DSP nodes coupled with a
reconfigurable layer.
In this presentation, case study oriented on option 3.

17 / 27
Refined Architecture Definition
GPP NODE
5x5
5x5
GALS
IF
GALS
IF
NI
Slave
Master
clock generator
GPP CORE 3x3
3x3
3D3D
DTL
DSP NODE
DSP CORE
GALS
IF
GALS
IF
NI
clock generator
AI
AI IF
BOTTOM LAYER
2D NOC
R3DNODE R3DNODE R3DNODE
TOP LAYER
FPGA CORE = eFPGA
GALS
IF
GALS
IF
3DNI
GALS
IF
GALS
IF
NI
AI
3DNI
GALS
IF
GALS
IF
NI
AINI
Slave Master
Logic density (kG/mm²) 1900
Memory density (kb/mm²) 1000
RAM Size (kb) Logic Area RAM Area Area mm² (28nm)
DSP node + 32kB (data+instr)
256 0,158 0,256 0,414
GPP node + 32kB (data) + 16kB (I$)
384 0,020 0,384 0,404

18 / 27
FlexTiles Layer Definition
Manycore layer:
• 20 GPP, 8 DSP nodes
• 2 DDR interfaces
Reconfigurable layer:
• 8 hardware accelerator
interface
• 1 reconfiguration
controller
I/O
I/O
DDR
DDR
2D
2D
DSP
2D
3D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
3D
NI GALS
DSP_S
NI GALS
2D
3D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
3D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
3D
NI GALS
2D
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
NI GALS
DSP
2D
3D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
3D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
NI GALS
GPP
2D
3D
NI GALS
DSP_S
NI GALS
GPP_N
NIGALS
DSP_E
NIGALS
GALS
DSP_E
NIGALS
GPP_E
NIGALS
GPP
NI GALS
DSP
2D
NI GALS
2D
2D
DSP
NI GALS
GPP_S
NI GALS
3D
GALS
Reconfiguration
Controller
3D
3D 3D
3D
3D
3D
3D
3D
3D
Reconfiguration
RAM
3DNI 3DNI3DNI
3DNI 3DNI
3DNI 3DNI3DNI
SoC characteristics
2x27mm² in techno 28nm
3D NoC characteristics
• 2D-mesh NoC on
bottom layer
• 3D router every 4 nodes
for vertical connectivity
• 2 external NoC
interfaces

19 / 27
Outline

20 / 27
TSV Cost Evaluation
I/O Pads µbuffers
µbuffers
I/O Pads
µbuffers
µbuffers
F2B
F2F
Face-to-Face Face-to-Back
Nb of TSV Area (%) Nb of TSV Area (%)
Bottom die power 648 0.47% 0 0.00%
Top die power 432 0.31% 432 0.31%
Package I/O power 46 0.03% 0 0.00%
Package I/O 305 0.22% 0 0.00%
3D I/O power 721 0.52% 360 0.26%
3D I/O 0 0.00% 3603 2.62%
TOTAL POWER
1847
(~×2)
1.34% 792 0.57%
TOTAL I/O 305 0.22% 3603 2.62%
TOTAL 2152 1.56%
4395
(~×2)
3.19%
Package I/O
3D I/O power
3D I/O
Bottom die power
Top die power
Package I/O power
Face-to-Face stacking option:
• High number of power TSV
• Half total TSV compared to Face-to-
Back alternative

21 / 27
FlexTiles 3D-IC Floorplanning (1/2)
Floorplan validation using Spyglass® Physical (Atrenta)
Early prototyping tool for 3D design
exploration
Comparison of Face-to-Face and Face-to-Back
3D-stacking options
Definition of microbump/TSV areas
400 connections to be placed
per NoC link
40µm pitch
6µm TSV diameter
4µm keep-out-zone

22 / 27
FlexTiles 3D-IC Floorplanning (2/2)
Detailed floorplan snapshots
Manycore layer Reconfigurable layer
5500µm
4900µm

23 / 27
Floorplanning Results
Wire length distribution and congestion analysis
1002451
6243
17
2
2
0
0
0
1
1002640
6047
24
2
2
0
0
1
0
3603
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
0% - 50% 50% - 100% 100% - 150% 150% - 200% 200% - 250% 250% - 300% 300% - 350% 350% - 400% 400% - 450%
Numberofnets
Nets F2F frontside
Nets F2B frontside
Nets F2B backside
% of Manhattan length

24 / 27
Outline

25 / 27
Conclusions
Case study to validate to silicon implementation feasibility
of FlexTiles architecture
TSV Analytical estimation
Floorplan exploration with early prototyping tools
Face-to-Face approach is confirmed to be the best
candidate since it reduces the number of TSVs.
Floorplanning results show the possibility to place TSVs and
microbumps in well-defined area in order to optimize the
wirelength constraint.
Alignment between the manycore components and the 3DNI in the
reconfigurable layer is challenging

26 / 27
Perspectives
Extended FlexTiles architecture with 3D interposer
Flexibility on computation power thanks
to manycore chiplets
Specialized chiplets for
high-constrained
application
System Architecture
• Scale-out architecture
• Coherent island with
remote communications
Chiplet
• Small chips
• Advanced technology
node
• Generic
• High volume
• Low cost
Interposer
• Passive or active
• Mature technology node
• Application specific
• Medium volume
• Cost effective assembly
• European fabs

27 / 27
THANK YOU FOR YOU ATTENTION
QUESTIONS?

Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems (AHS'14) - The 3D FlexTiles Concept

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems (AHS'14) - The 3D FlexTiles Concept

Similar to Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems (AHS'14) - The 3D FlexTiles Concept (20)

More from FlexTiles Team

More from FlexTiles Team (14)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems (AHS'14) - The 3D FlexTiles Concept