English
Process Detector (For DVFS and monitoring process variation)
Insuring silicon Intellectual Property interoperability with OCP consensus profiles
By Vesa Lahtinen, Yasumasa Nakada, Christophe Sucur and Drew Wingard, OCP-IP Specification Working Group
Embedded.com -- (05/13/08, 12:05:00 AM EDT)
The ability to use internally and externally developed IP (Intellectual Property) cores in ASIC creation is essential to achieving high quality products and time-to-market for any designer of ASICs and SoCs.
Since 2001, OCP-IP (Open Core Protocol " International Partnership) consortium has provided an open standard synchronous protocol for point-to-point interconnection of IP modules.
OCP has a wide range of configuration parameters which makes OCP uniquely easy to be optimized to fit the varying demands of a wide range of IP cores and systems.
When the parameterization of the master and slave interfaces do not match, the protocol defines a set of rules that both ensure interoperability wherever possible, and describes behavioral restrictions on the master and/or slave to increase interoperability.
When the interface parameterization differs sufficiently that key master or slave functionality is not supported by the other side, protocol conversion bridging is occasionally required. When the IP cores that are inconsistent are separated by a shared interconnect, it is sometimes a role of the interconnect to provide this protocol conversion.
Embedded.com -- (05/13/08, 12:05:00 AM EDT)
The ability to use internally and externally developed IP (Intellectual Property) cores in ASIC creation is essential to achieving high quality products and time-to-market for any designer of ASICs and SoCs.
Since 2001, OCP-IP (Open Core Protocol " International Partnership) consortium has provided an open standard synchronous protocol for point-to-point interconnection of IP modules.
OCP has a wide range of configuration parameters which makes OCP uniquely easy to be optimized to fit the varying demands of a wide range of IP cores and systems.
When the parameterization of the master and slave interfaces do not match, the protocol defines a set of rules that both ensure interoperability wherever possible, and describes behavioral restrictions on the master and/or slave to increase interoperability.
When the interface parameterization differs sufficiently that key master or slave functionality is not supported by the other side, protocol conversion bridging is occasionally required. When the IP cores that are inconsistent are separated by a shared interconnect, it is sometimes a role of the interconnect to provide this protocol conversion.
|
E-mail This Article | 
|
|
Printer-Friendly Page |
|
||||||
Related Articles
- Silicon Intellectual Property - Delivering value to customers
- Three Major Inflection Points for Sourcing Bluetooth Intellectual Property
- Design Rights Management of Intellectual Property (IP) Cores in SoPC designs
- Intellectual property security: A challenge for embedded systems developers
- Ensuring Successful Third Party Intellectual Property (IP) Integration
New Articles
- Why RISC-V is a viable option for safety-critical applications
- Dimensioning in 3D space: Object Volumetric Measurement by Leveraging Depth Camera-based Reconstruction on NVIDIA Edge devices
- What is JESD204B? Quick summary of the standard
- Post-Quantum Cryptography - Securing Semiconductors in a Post-Quantum World
- Analysis and Summary on Clock Generator Circuits and PLL Design
Most Popular
- System Verilog Assertions Simplified
- Enhancing VLSI Design Efficiency: Tackling Congestion and Shorts with Practical Approaches and PnR Tool (ICC2)
- System Verilog Macro: A Powerful Feature for Design Verification Projects
- Method for Booting ARM Based Multi-Core SoCs
- An Outline of the Semiconductor Chip Design Flow