Synthesis & Logic Optimization · All levels

Topographical Synthesis: Comparison Matrix

Comparison Matrix for Topographical Synthesis.

Comparison matrix

Topographical and congestion-aware options trade runtime for correlation quality.

diagram
+------------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Approach         | Strength       | Weakness       | Best when      |
+------------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Conservative     | stable         | slower         | new design spin |
| Balanced         | practical      | needs monitoring | normal closure |
| Aggressive       | fast           | higher risk    | schedule crunch |
| Structural       | durable        | long loop      | repeat offender |
+------------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+

When to choose each approach

  • Select strategy by risk budget, not convenience.

Interview traps

  • Skipping manifest diff

  • No side-effect regression

Evidence comparison

diagram
SYNTHESIS EVIDENCE MATRIX — Topographical Synthesis

+--------------------+------------------------+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| Evidence            | Tells you              | Does not prove           | Next action             |
+--------------------+------------------------+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| compile QoR report  | metric movement        | root-cause class         | inspect transform logs  |
| SDC diff            | constraint drift       | library quality          | rerun with baseline SDC |
| library map diff    | cell view changes      | RTL intent quality       | lock/validate lib set   |
| topo vs logical QoR | physical correlation   | final route signoff      | PD trial correlation    |
| regression matrix   | closure stability      | architecture optimality  | decide merge/rollback   |
+--------------------+------------------------+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Synthesis deep dive

Physical-aware synthesis reduces logic-to-route surprise when correlation is monitored.

Concept diagram

diagram
PHYSICAL-AWARE LOOP

topo compile -> congestion hints -> handoff -> PD correlation

Metric graph

diagram
CORRELATION DELTA

logic view WNS      ███████
topo view WNS       █████
route trial WNS     ████

Reports and artifacts

  • topo QoR

  • congestion heatmap

  • handoff manifest

  • delta compare vs PD

Mini case study

Topo compile looked clean, but hotspot congestion predicted route failure and prevented late ECO churn.

Debug branches

  • Check hotspot ownership

  • Bound correlation drift

  • Escalate if handoff assumptions stale

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.

Principal synthesis review addendum

Topographical mode estimates physical effects during synthesis to reduce handoff surprises between logic and implementation views.

Metric: topo-vs-logic WNS delta, estimated wirelength, congestion hotspots