-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 111
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[RWRoute] Adjust wire base costs + cross SLR estimates #1030
Draft
eddieh-xlnx
wants to merge
19
commits into
rwroute_capped_bias
Choose a base branch
from
rwroute_new_base_costs
base: rwroute_capped_bias
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
eddieh-xlnx
force-pushed
the
rwroute_new_base_costs
branch
from
July 12, 2024 22:44
a20d0ed
to
3dfc9b6
Compare
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
eddieh-xlnx
force-pushed
the
rwroute_new_base_costs
branch
from
July 16, 2024 20:57
4398fd7
to
56e41f0
Compare
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@amd.com>
eddieh-xlnx
commented
Aug 12, 2024
@@ -1911,6 +1911,7 @@ private float getNodeCost(RouteNode rnode, Connection connection, int countSameS | |||
// CRoute paper states that the bias factor cannot be more than half of the wire cost | |||
// (it may exceed this here because we may not be using the minimum-sized bounding box) | |||
float biasCost = rnode.getBaseCost() * Math.min(distToCenter * net.getBiasFactor(), 0.5f); | |||
biasCost = 0; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
biasCost = 0; |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
i. A
NODE_SINGLE
/NODE_DOUBLE
can (typically) no longer lead to a lower total path cost than theNODE_LOCAL
that feeds it, even if it gets us closer to the sink. The reasoning is that we want all the equivalent-costNODE_LOCAL
-s to be explored before allowing single/double wires to be taken, in case there is a chance that a longer wire (double/quad) that can get us there even more efficiently.Take for example the following, where the sink is solely to its north:
Now, expansion of
LAG_LAG_X102Y359/RXD1
would place allINT_NODE_SDQ_7[46]_INT_OUT[01]
nodes onto the priority queue, all with the same cost ofC0
.If
NN1
orNN2
's cost (C1
/C2
) was smaller thanC0
, then RWRoute would explore those nodes ahead of the otherINT_NODE_SDQ
s and miss out on theNN4
(which potentially leads to aNN12
)Ideally, we want:
C1 (NN1) > C2 (NN2) > C0 > C3 (NN4)
assuming that the sink is at least 4 tiles away such that single and double wires are not explored before all theSDQ
nodes are explored, but quads and longs that close the distance to the sink will take priority.RouteNodeGraph.accessibleWireOnlyIfAboveBelowTarget
nodes (e.g.INT_NODE_IMUX
/BYPASS
/BOUNCE
/etc.) nodes if no SLR crossing needed to reach sink