Part of the  

Chip Design Magazine

  Network

About  |  Contact

Posts Tagged ‘Synopsys’

Next Page »

Blog Review – Monday, June 12, 2017

Monday, June 12th, 2017

This week, we find traffic systems for drones and answers to the questions ‘What’s the difference between safe and secure?’ and ‘Can you hear voice control calling?’

An interesting foray into semantics is conducted by Andrew Hopkins, ARM, as he looks at what makes a system secure and what makes a system safe and can the two adjectives be interchanged in terms of SoC design? (With a little plug for ARM at DAC later this month.)

It had to happen, a traffic system designed to restore order to the skies as commercial drones increase in number. Ken Kaplan, Intel, looks at what NASA scientists and technology leaders have come up with to make sense of the skies.

Voice control is ready to bring voice automation to the smart home, says Kjetil Holstad, Nordic Semiconductor. He highlights a fine line of voice-activation’s predecessors and looks to the future with context-awareness.

More word play, this time from Tom De Schutter, Synopsys, who discusses verification and validation and their role in prototyping.

Tackling two big announcements from Mentor Graphics, Mike Santarini, looks at the establishment of the outsourced assembly and test (OSAT) Alliance program, and the company’s Xpedition high-density advanced packaging (HDAP) flow. He educates without patronizing on why the latter in particular is good news for fabless companies and where it fits in the company’s suite of tools. He also manages to flag up technical sessions on the topic at next month’s DAC.

Reporting from IoT DevCon, Christine Young, Maxim Integrated, highlights the theme of security in a connected world. She reviews the presentation “Shifting the IoT Mindset from Security to Trust,” by Bill Diotte, CEO of Mocana, and In “Zero-Touch Device Onboarding for IoT,” by Jennifer Gilburg, director of strategy, Internet of Things Identity at Intel. She explores a lot of the pitfalls and perils with problem-solving.

Anticipating a revolution in transportation, Alyssa, Dassault Systemes, previews this week’s Movin’On in Montreal, Canada, with an interview with colleague and keynote speaker, Guillaume Gerondeau, Senior Director Transportation and Mobility Asia. He looks at how smart mobility will impact cities and how 3D virtual tools can make the changes accessible and acceptable.

Caroline Hayes, Senior Editor

Blog Review – Monday, April 24, 2017

Monday, April 24th, 2017

This week’s blogs are concerned with AI and intelligent, connected vehicles, sometimes both. There are quests to find the facts behind myths and searches for answers for power management and software security too.

Is an effective tool for verification, the stuff of legends? Gabe Moretti, Chip Design Magazine, seeks the truth behind Pegasus – no, not the winged horse, the more earthly verification engine from Cadence.

A power strategy is one thing, but a free trial adds a new dimension to energy management. Don Dingee, Sonics, elaborates on the company’s plan to bring power to the masses, using hardware IP and ICE-Grain Power architecture.

If you are unsure about USB, Senad Lomigora, ON Semiconductor’s blog should help. It looks at what it’s for, why we can’t get enough of USB Type C, USB 3.1, connectors and re-drivers.

Every vehicle’s ADAS relies on good visuals, observes Jim Harrison, guest blogger, Maxim Integrated, and good connectivity. He looks at the securely connected autonomous car, and then homes in on explained how Maxim Integrated exploits GMSL, an alternative to Ethernet, in its MAX96707 and MAX96708 chips, to create an effective in-car communication network.

Still with the connected car, Pete Decher, Mentor Graphics, is fresh from the Autotech Council meeting in San Jose. The company’s DRS360 Autonomous Driving Platform launch was high on the list of discussion topics, along with the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in the future of driving.

Still with AI, Evens Pan, ARM provides an in-depth blog on Chinese start-up, Peceptin’s enabled embedded deep learning. The case study is fascinating and well reported in this comprehensive essay.

Making any software engineer feel insecure about software security is an everyday occurrence, helping them out is a little more out-of-the-ordinary, so if it refreshing to see a post from the editorial team, Synopsys, letting the put-upon software engineer know there is a webinar coming soon (May 2) to enlighten them on the Building Security In Maturity Model (BSIMM), with a link to register to attend.

Caroline Hayes, Senior Editor

Blog Review – Monday, April 10, 2017

Monday, April 10th, 2017

This week, there are traps and lures in the IoT, as discussed by ARM and Maxim Integrated; Xilinx believes a video tutorial is a good use of time; Get cosy with SNUG for some insight; and ON Semiconductor is keeping an eye on you

Beware of delivery men bearing IoT gifts, warns, Donnie Garcia, ARM, who also looks at trap doors and NXP’s Kinetis KBOOT bootloader to foil a new attack vector and advertise a related webinar on April 25.

Nagging parents had the right idea, decides Russ Klein, Mentor Graphics, remembering entreaties to turn off lights, and whose energy saving advice he now applies to SoCs and embedded systems, with the help of the Veloce emulator.

Gabe Moretti, Chip Design, gets a bit saucy, trying to figure just what is Portable Stimulus. He gets down to the nitty gritty with how the Accellera System Initiative can help, but still believes some areas need to attended to. Let’s hope the industry pays heed.

More warnings from Kris Ardis, Maxim Integrated, and connected devices. While a Jacquard print may not be to everyone’s taste, the idea of protecting the IoT and its data has universal appeal.

The appeal of Agile design is not lost on Randy Smith, Sonics, who writes about the concept and Agile software development. He deftly dives into advances in Agile hardware design and IC methodology for Agile techniques – keeping every design engineer on their toes.

A visit to ISC West, the security expo, has made Jason Liu, ON Semiconductor, think about surveillance systems, as he throws a spotlight on one of the company’s introductions.

14 minutes does not sound like a long time to pack in all you need to know about Zynq UltraScale+ MPSoCs and Vivado Design Suite, but Steve Leibson, Xilinx points readers towards an interesting, informative video, which he describes as a fast and painless way to see the development tools used in a fully operation system.

It sounds like a self-satisfied neck-warmer, but SNUG (Synopsys User Group) events can be informative. Tom De Schutter attended the one in Silicon Valley and relates what he learned from the technical track with experts from ARM, NVIDIA, Intel and Synopsys about prototyping latch-based designs, ARM CPU and GPU increasing densities and more besides.

Striving to improve the lot of IoT designers, John Blyler, Embedded Systems, talks to Jim Bruister, SOC Solutions, about markets, licensing, open source and five elements that will drive improvement.

Compiled by Caroline Hayes, Senior Editor

Behold the Intrinsic Value of IP

Monday, March 13th, 2017

By Grant Pierce, CEO

Sonics, Inc.

Editor’s Note [this article was written in response to questions about IP licensing practices.  A follow-up article will be published in the next 24 hours with the title :” Determining a Fair Royalty Value for IP”].

figure

Understanding the intrinsic value of Intellectual Property is like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder.  The beholder of IP Value is ultimately the user/consumer of that IP – the buyers. Buyers tend to value IP based upon their ability to utilize that IP to create competitive advantage, and therefore higher value for their end product. The IP Value figure above was created to capture this concept.

To be clear, this view is NOT about relative bargaining power between buyer and the supplier of IP – the seller –  that is built on the basis of patents. Mounds of court cases and text books exist that explore the question of patent strength. What I am positing is that viewing IP value as a matter of a buyer’s perception is a useful way to think of the intrinsic value of IP.

Position A on the value chart is a classification of IP that allows little differentiation by the buyer, but is addressing a more elastic market opportunity. This would likely be a Standard IP type that would implement an open standard. IP in this category would likely have multiple sources and therefore competitive pricing.  Although compliance with the standard would be valued by the buyer, the price of the IP itself would be likely lower reflecting its commodity nature. Here, the value might be equated to the cost of internally creating equivalent IP. Since few, if any, buyers in this category would see advantage for making this IP themselves and because there are likely many sellers, the intrinsic value of this IP is determined on a “buy vs buy” basis.  Buyers are going to buy this IP regardless, so they’ll look for the seller with the proposition most favorable to the buyer – which often is just about price.

Position B on the value chart is a classification of IP that allows for differentiation by the buyer, but addresses a more elastic market. IP in this category might be less constrained by standards requirements. It is likely that buyers would implement unique instantiations of this IP type and as a result command some end competitive advantage. Buyers in this category could make this IP themselves, but because there are commercial alternatives, the intrinsic value is determined by applying a “make vs buy” analysis. The value proposition of the sellers of this type of IP often include some important, but soft value propositions (e.g., ease of re-use, time-to-market, esoteric features), the make vs buy determination is highly variable and often buyer-specific. This in part explains the variability of pricing for this type of IP.

Position C on the value chart is a classification of IP that serves a less elastic market and empowers buyers to differentiate through their unique implementations of that IP. This classification of IP supports license fees and larger, more consistent, royalty rates. IP in this category becomes the competitive differentiation that sways large market share to the winning products incorporating that IP. This category supports some of the larger IP companies in the marketplace today. Buyers in this category are not going to make the IP themselves because the cost of development of the product and its ecosystem is too prohibitive and risky. The intrinsic value really comes down to what the seller charges.

This is a “buy vs not make” decision – meaning one either buys the IP or it doesn’t bother to make the product. A unique hallmark of IP in this position is that so long as the seller applies pricing consistently, then all buyers know at the very least that they are not disadvantaged relative to the competition and will continue to buy. Sellers will often give some technology away to encourage long-term lock in. For these reasons, pricing of IP in this space tends to be quite stable. That pricing level must subjectively be below the level that customers begin to perform unnatural acts and explore unusual alternatives.  So long as it does, the price charged probably represents accurately the intrinsic value.

Position D on the value chart is a classification of IP that requires adherence to a standard. Like category A, adherence to the standard does not necessarily allow differentiation to the buyer. The buyer of this category of IP might be required to use this IP in order to gain access to the market itself. Though the lack of end-product differentiation available to the buyer might suggest a lower license fee and/or lower to zero royalty rate, we see a significantly less elastic market for this IP type.

This IP category tends to comprise products adhering to closed and/or proprietary standards. IP products built on such closed and/or proprietary standards have given rise to several significant IP business franchises in the marketplace today. The IP in position D is in part characterized by the need to spend significant time and money to develop, market and maintain (defend) their position, in addition to spending on IP development. For this reason, teasing out the intrinsic value of this IP is not as straightforward as “make vs buy.” Pricing is really viewed more as a tax. So the intrinsic value determination is based on a “Fair Tax” basis. If buyers think the tax is no longer “fair,” for any reason, they will make the move to a different technology.

Examples:

Position A:  USB, PCI, memory interfaces (Synopsys)

Position B:  Configurable Processors, Analog IP cores (Synopsys, Cadence)

Position C:  General Purpose Processors, Graphics, DSP, NoC, EPU (ARM, Imagination, CEVA, Sonics)

Position D: CDMA, Noise Reduction, DDR (Qualcomm, Dolby, Rambus)

Why Customer Success is Paramount

Sonics is an IP supplier whose products tend to reside in the Type C category. Sonics sets its semiconductor IP pricing as a function of the value of the SoC design/chip that uses the IP. There is a spectrum of value functions for the Sonics IP depending upon the type of chip, complexity of design, target power/performance, expected volume, and other factors. Defining the upper and lower bounds of the value spectrum depends upon an approximation of these factors for each particular chip design and customer.

Royalties are one component of the price of IP and are a way of risk sharing to allow customers to bring their products to market without having to pay the full value of the incorporated IP up front. The benefit being that the creator and supplier of the IP is essentially investing in the overall success of the user’s product by accepting the deferred royalty payment. Sonics views the royalty component of its IP pricing as “customer success fees.”

With its recently introduced EPU technology, Sonics has adopted an IP business model based upon an annual technology access fee and a per power grain usage fee due at chip tapeout. Under this model, customers have unlimited use of the technology to explore power control for as many designs as they want, but only pay for their actual IP usage in a completed design. The tape out fee is calculated based on the number of power grains used in the design on a sliding scale. The more power grains customers use, the more energy saved, and the lower the cost per grain. Using more power grains drives lower energy consumption by the chip – buyers increase the market value of their chips using Sonics’ EPU technology. The bottom line is that Sonics’ IP business model depends on customers successfully completing their designs using Sonics IP.

Blog Review – Monday, February 13, 2017

Monday, February 13th, 2017

Among this week’s topics: two important announcements: the OpenFog Consortium and IEEE Standard for the Functional Verification Language e; a panel discusses the Internet and beyond; Mentor Graphics applies IoT to PCB design; FASTR accelerates the connected car and why USB is not as easy as 123

The importance of IP blocks is a given, but Rocke Acree, ON Semiconductor, explains how selection also has to consider technology and support tools. The company has collaborated with Hexius Semiconductor to qualify analog IP blocks to reduce design cycles and development time.

There are specific constraints, challenges and design requirements for PCBs designed for the burgeoning IoT market. John McMillan, Mentor Graphics has created a two-part blog focused on this topic.

Doing a quickstep around the topic of USB, Eric Huang, Synopsys, explores verification and FPGA prototyping for best results. He recommends some design rules, a test site, then curiously, throws in some political comment, a film review and dance-related jokes to end the blog.

It may not be an understatement by Rhonda Dirvin, ARM, to say that the day the OpenFog Consortium announced its reference architecture is the day we have all been waiting for. Hyperbole? Possibly not, as it defines how secure, interoperable products should be built – just what the connected world needs. She helpfully includes a link to the architecture, and a heads-up on a presentation at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain (Feb 27 to March 3).

If there is an award for Most Apt Acronym, the Future of Automotive Security Technology Research (FASTR) consortium, must be a contender. The uncredited Rambus blog reviews the brief history of the consortium, and discusses its recent manifesto, looking at why it is need for a secure, connected vehicle industry.

2017 begins with the publication of IEEE Std 1647 2016, the IEEE Standard for the Functional Verification Language e. of 2017. Efrat Shneydor, Cadence Design, looks at the enhancements which have been made and proficiently summarizes the highlights.

Generic connectivity is not enough – NASA has been designing, building and launching satellite systems with the goal of providing connectivity throughout the world. The concept and realities of the Internet of Space is the panel discussion topic, reported by John Blyler, Chip Design Magazine.

Caroline Hayes, Senior Editor

Blog Review – Monday, January 23, 2017

Monday, January 23rd, 2017

This week’s blogs show the human face of automated driving; and why energy should be taken seriously. There is lift-off for SpaceX to bring more satellite comms and a poetic turn, in the style of Rudyar Kipling’s classic poem.

There is a human element to automated driving, namely Human Machine Interface (HMI) and Jack Weast, Intel, uses his second blog post to examine how and why it can be used. He promises more in part three into the company’s research.

Energy is a serious business, says Grant Pierce, Sonics, and the electronics industry must shoulder some responsibility for power savings. The company, with Semico Research is conducting a survey and wants your help into understanding today’s and tomorrow’s power requirements.

Boosting the satellites to provide point-to-point communications, the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket put the first 10 Iridium NEXT satellites into Low Earth Orbit (LEO), equipped with Xilinx space-grade Virtex-5QV FPGAs to implement the satellites’ On Board Processor (OBP) hardware. Steve Liebson, Xilinx, includes a link to a video describing the constellation and the launch.

Celebrating the relationship with Ericsson, Dassault Systèmes’ Olivier Ribet, looks at how the latter’s Networked Society will transform the way we interact with the world around us and meet technology challenges, such as 5G, IoT and the cloud.

Moving to 10nm and lower process geometries pushes the boundaries of FinFET and the custom layout flow and this means trouble ahead, warns Graham Etchells.

A touch of culture, with a poem “wot I wrote” by Keith Hanna, Mentor Graphics. He deftly tackles Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) as Rudyard Kipling might.

Image data and the mysteries of how to create, access and use a Qimage to greatest effect is detailed by Laszlo Agocs, Qt, with three case studies to illustrate what can be done.

A sharp video addressing the interconnect verification challenges is hosted by Nimrod Reiss. Cadence’s Corrie Callenbach has found and highlighted the video.

Caroline Hayes, senior editor

Blog Review – Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Tuesday, November 22nd, 2016

New specs for PCI Express 4.0; Smart homes gateway webinar this week; sensors – kits and tools; the car’s the connected star; Intel unleashes AI

Change is good – isn’t it? Richard Solomon, Synopsys, prepares for the latest draft of PCI Express 4.0, with some hacks for navigating the 1,400 pages.

Following a triumphant introduction at ARM TechCon 016, Diya Soubra, ARM, examines the ARM Cortex-M33 from the dedicated co-processor interface to security around the IoT.

Steer clear of manipulating a layout hierarchy, advises Rishu Misri Jaggi, Cadence Design Systems. She advocates the Layout XL Generation command to put together a Virtuoso Layout XL-compliant design, with some sound reasoning – and a video – to back up her promotion.

A study to save effort is always a winner and Aditya Mittal and Bhavesh Shrivastava, Arrow, include the results of their comparisons in performing typical debug tasks. Although the aim is to save time, the authors have spent time in doing a thorough job on this study.

Are smart homes a viable reality? Benny Harven, Imagination Technologies, asks for a diary not for a webinar later this week (Nov 23) for smart home gateways – how to make them cost-effective and secure.

Changes in working practice mean sensors and security need attention and some help. Scott Jones, Maxim Integrated looks at the company’s latest reference design.

Still with sensors, Brian Derrick, Mentor Graphics Design, looks at how smartphones are opening up opportunities for sensor-based features for the IoT.

This week’s LA Auto Show, inspires Danny Shapiro, NVIDIA, to look at how the company is driving technology trends in vehicles. Amongst the name dropping (Tesla, Audi, IBM Watson) some of the pictures in the blog inspire pure auto-envy.

A guide to artificial intelligence (AI) by Douglas Fisher, Intel, has some insights into where and how it can be used and how the company is ‘upstreaming’ the technology.

Caroline Hayes, Senior Editor

Blog Review –Monday, October 24 2016

Monday, October 24th, 2016

The how, what and why of time-of-flight sensors; Conference season: ARM TechCon 2016 and IoT Solutions Congress; Save time on big data analysis; In praise of FPGAs; Is it time for augmented and virtual reality?

Drastically reducing big data analysis is music to a data scientist’s ears. Larry Hardesty reports on researchers at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) have presented an automated system that can reduce preparation and analysis from months to just hours.

Keeping an eye on the nation’s bank vaults, Robert Vamosi, Synopsys, looks at the what bank regulators are doing to ramp up cybersecurity.

If you can’t head to Barcelona, Spain this week for IoT Solutions World Congress (October 25-27), Jonathan Ballon, Intel, reveals what the company will unveil, including a keynote: IoT: From Hype to Reality, what 5G means, smart cities and a hackathon.

Tired of the buzz, and seeking enlightenment, Jeff Bier, Berkeley Design, delves into just what is augmented reality and virtual reality. He examines hardware and software, markets and what is needed for widespread adoption.

Closer to home, 2016 ARM TechCon, in Santa Clara, California (October 25 – 27), Phil Brumby, Mentor Graphics, offers a heads-up on its industrial robot demo, using Nucleus RTOS separated by ARM TrustZone, and the ECU (Engine Control Unit) demo in a Linux-hosted In-Vehicle Infotainment (IVI) system. There is also a technical session: Making Sure your UI makes the most of the ARM-based SoC (Thurs, 10.30am, Ballroom E)

The role of memory is reviewed by Paul McLellan, Cadence Design System, as he discusses MemCon keynotes by Hugh Durdan, VP of the IP Group and Steve Pwalowski, VP of Advanced Computing Solutions at Micron. There is comprehensive pricing strategy and a look at industry trends.

A teardown of the Apple iPhone 7, by Dick James, Chipworks, links STMicroelectronics’ time-of-flight sensors with the Starship Enterprise. The blog has a comprehensive answer to questions such as what are these sensors and why are they in phones.

If the IoT is flexible, Zibi Zalewski, Aldec, argues, then FPGAs can tailor solutions without major investments in an ASIC. He takes Xilinx’s Zynq-7000 All-Programmable SoC as a starting point and illustrates how it can boost performance for IoT gateways.

Elegantly illustrating how multiple Eclipse projects can be run on a single microcontroller with MicroEJ, Charlottem, ARM, runs through a connected washing machine that can communicate via Bluetooth, MQTT, Z-Wave and LWM2M.

Caroline Hayes, Senior Editor

Blog Review – Monday, October 10, 2016

Monday, October 10th, 2016

This week, bloggers look at the newly released ARM Cortex-R52 and its support, NVIDIA floats the idea of AI in automotives, Dassault Systèmes looks at underwater construction, Intrinsic-ID’s CEO shares about security, and there is a glimpse into the loneliness of the long distance debugger

There is a peek into the Xilinx Embedded Software Community Conference as Steve Leibson, Xilinx, shares the OKI IDS real-time, object-detection system using a Zynq SoC.

The lure of the ocean, and the glamor of Porsche and Volvo SUVs, meant that NVIDIA appealed to all-comers at its inaugural GPU Technology Conference Europe. It parked a Porsche Macan and a Volvo XC90 on top of the Ocean Diva, docked at Amsterdam. Making waves, the Xavier SoC, the Quadro demonstration and a discussion about AI in the automotive industry.

Worried about IoT security, Robert Vamosi, Synopsys, looks at the source code that targets firmware on IoT devices, and fears where else it may be used.

Following the launch of the ARM Cortex-R52 processor, which raises the bar in terms of functional safety, Jason Andrews looks at the development tools available for the new ARMv8-R architecture, alongside a review of what’s new in the processor offering.

If you are new to portable stimulus, Tom A, Cadence, has put together a comprehensive blog about the standard designed to help developers with verification reuse, test automation and coverage. Of course, he also mentions the role of the company’s Perspec System Verifier, but this is an informative blog, not a marketing pitch.

Undersea hotels sounds like the holiday of the future, and Deepak Datye, Dassault Systèmes, shows how structures for wonderful pieces of architecture can be realized with the company’s , the 3DExperience Platform.

Capturing the frustration of an engineer mid-debug, Rich Edelman, Mentor Graphics, contributes a long, blow-by-blow account of that elusive, thankless task, that he names UVM Misery, where a customer’s bug, is your bug now.

Giving Pim Tuyls, CEO of Intrinsic-ID, a grilling about security, Gabe Moretti, Chip Design magazine, teases out the difference between security and integrity and how to increase security in ways that will be adopted across the industry.

Blog Review – Monday, September 26, 2016

Monday, September 26th, 2016

Robotic surgery reaches new levels, and ARM raises safety critical benchmarks with Cortex-R52, supported by Synopsys tools. There is a preview of Intel’s DVCon Europe’s presentation for virtual systems and DTF proves to be a classic rulebook.

Described as a ‘fairy tale’ by the grateful recipient, surgeon using a joystick to remove a membrane from the patient’s eye could sound like an Orwellian nightmare, but Tom Smithyman, ANSYS, has collected his favorite blogs, one of which is on the BBC website and explains how surgeons at the John Radcliffe Hospital performed robotic-assisted eye surgery.

You may have heard that ARM launched its Cortex-R52, ARMv8-R processor and hot on the heels of the announcement, Synopsys has announced design support for safety critical automotive, healthcare and industrial applications, reports Phil Dworsky, Synopsys.

Still with ARM, Rob Coombs, explains how mobile security architecture can be adapted for IoT applications, with copious graphics and an introduction to TrustZone for ARMv8-M on microcontrollers.

The more things change, the more they stay the same, can be the conclusion reading a blog by Stephen Pateras, Mentor Graphics, who shows that DFT-related rules hold true now, as they did in the 1980s.

Is a coup is in the offing at the IEEE? John Blyler Systems Design Engineering, makes sure of the facts by checking with the current President-Elect, Karen Bartleson about the proposed amendment to the IEEE constitution ahead of next month’s vote.

DVCon Europe 2016 takes place in the German city of Munich next month and Jakob Engblorn, Intel, will present a paper there based on integrating SystemC models into a virtual system. For those who can’t attend in person, his blog previews his technical and informative paper.

Caroline Hayes, Senior Editor

Next Page »