A Hybrid Time Borrowing Technique to Improve the Performance of Digital Circuits in the Presence of Variations

Dynamic flip-flop conversion (DFFC) is a time borrowing method for improving the performance of digital circuits. Existing types of DFFC [11], [12] suffer from successive critical and critical feedback paths that are frequently seen in digital circuits. Moreover, they are unable to increase the perf...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:IEEE transactions on circuits and systems. I, Regular papers Regular papers, 2017-01, Vol.64 (1), p.100-110
Main Authors: Ahmadi, Mehrnaz, Alizadeh, Bijan, Forouzandeh, Behjat
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Circuit design
Clocks
Delays
Digital circuits
Digital electronics
Dynamic flip-flop conversion
Feedback
hold time violation (HTV)
Latches
Microarchitecture
Performance enhancement
Power supplies
process variation
setup time violation (STV)
State of the art
time borrowing
transparency window
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Dynamic flip-flop conversion (DFFC) is a time borrowing method for improving the performance of digital circuits. Existing types of DFFC [11], [12] suffer from successive critical and critical feedback paths that are frequently seen in digital circuits. Moreover, they are unable to increase the performance of the designs with short sequential depth. In this paper, we introduce a hybrid technique which utilizes DFFC together with a dynamic clock stretching mechanism. Our technique is able to mitigate the problems of successive critical and critical feedback path structures even in the presence of process variations. The results show that our hybrid technique is able to increase the performance of some ITC'99 and ISCAS'89 benchmarks by 24.4% on average while DFFC Type C increases the performance only by 8.4% on average. Furthermore, we have shown that our hybrid technique is able to tolerate process variations, 18% power supply variation, and 100 °C temperature variations, 27.3%, 16.4%, and 13.3% better than the state-of-the-art methods on average, respectively.
ISSN:1549-8328
1558-0806
DOI:10.1109/TCSI.2016.2600750