Synthesis & Logic Optimization · All levels
Leakage Recovery: Mechanism
Mechanism for Leakage Recovery.
Mechanism to understand
Mechanism for Leakage Recovery focuses on leakage delta, WNS guardband consumed, swapped-cell count. The goal is to connect observed QoR movement to mechanism, ownership, and regression risk.
Leakage recovery replaces fast cells with higher-VT alternatives while preserving margin on critical paths and corners. Treat synthesis as a contract: constraints + transforms + reports must agree.
Identify which lane moved first: timing, area, power, or runtime.
Identify whether drift is input, transform, or correlation related.
Identify owner before applying any ECO.
Flow model
SYNTHESIS FLOW — Leakage Recovery
RTL + constraints
|
v
elaboration + checks
|
v
mapping + optimization
|
v
QoR reports (timing/area/power)
|
v
incremental ECO + regression
Primary metric: leakage delta, WNS guardband consumed, swapped-cell countLeakage recovery pass
timing-safe cells
-> swap to higher VT
-> re-check setup/hold
-> keep only safe swapsLayer responsibilities
SYNTHESIS OWNERSHIP LAYERS — Leakage Recovery
layer owns failure mode
---------------- --------------------------- -------------------------
constraints clocks/exceptions/policy fake QoR optimism
mapping cell choices/structure depth/fanout regressions
optimization timing/power tradeoffs one-metric overfitting
physical-aware topo/congestion estimates handoff delta surprises
closure ECO order/regression fixes break other cornersSynthesis deep dive
PPA closure is a constrained tradeoff problem, not a timing-only exercise.
Concept diagram
PPA TRIAD
timing target <-> power budget <-> area capMetric graph
PARETO PROGRESSION
early runs o o
balanced point o
over-tuned o (risk)Reports and artifacts
VT mix
leakage trend
dynamic power trend
PPA Pareto table
Mini case study
LVT-heavy fix recovered setup but violated leakage target; balanced VT strategy closed both.
Debug branches
Timing-only claims need power check
Validate hold on VT swaps
Use Pareto memo
Senior review question
Ask: what evidence proves this QoR move is real and stable?
Key takeaways
State exact run context (RTL, SDC, libs, switches) with every QoR claim.
Re-run timing, area, and power regressions after each synthesis ECO.
Common pitfalls
Comparing runs with mismatched constraints or library views.
Timing-only fixes that violate power or area budgets.
Skipping equivalence checks after structural changes.
Mechanism deep dive
Leakage recovery replaces fast cells with higher-VT alternatives while preserving margin on critical paths and corners.