CN109543308B - Method for verifying design rule check script - Google Patents
Method for verifying design rule check script Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN109543308B CN109543308B CN201811408981.8A CN201811408981A CN109543308B CN 109543308 B CN109543308 B CN 109543308B CN 201811408981 A CN201811408981 A CN 201811408981A CN 109543308 B CN109543308 B CN 109543308B
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- graphic
- design rule
- units
- layout
- layout design
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Active
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING OR CALCULATING; COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
- G06F30/30—Circuit design
- G06F30/39—Circuit design at the physical level
- G06F30/398—Design verification or optimisation, e.g. using design rule check [DRC], layout versus schematics [LVS] or finite element methods [FEM]
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Computer Hardware Design (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Evolutionary Computation (AREA)
- Geometry (AREA)
- General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Design And Manufacture Of Integrated Circuits (AREA)
Abstract
The invention discloses a method for verifying a design rule check script, which comprises the following steps: s1, extracting a plurality of graphic units of different categories from a graphic unit library according to a graphic classification rule; s2, mapping the same type of graphic units on the same layout to form a plurality of test layouts respectively associated with the graphic units of each type; s3, sequentially carrying out verification test on the design rule check script on each test layout and generating a test result; s4, judging whether the test result conforms to the characteristic relation rule corresponding to the graphic unit of the corresponding category; if not, turning to S6; s5, judging that the design rule check script passes the verification test and issuing; and S6, modifying the design rule checking script, and turning to S3. The beneficial effects of the above technical scheme are: the test layout is made to contain all the graph structures defined in the design rule, and the design rule checking script test based on the test layout has comprehensiveness and accuracy.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of manufacturability design, in particular to a method for verifying a design rule check script.
Background
PCB (Printed circuit board), which is called Printed Circuit Board (PCB) in chinese, is an important electronic component, a support for electronic components, and a carrier for electrical connection of electronic components. In the Design of PCB, design Rule (Design Rule) is the key to the success or failure of a PCB Design. Due to the physical characteristics of the devices and process limitations, the size of the physical layer on the chip, and thus the design of the layout, must comply with certain rules. These design rules are established by the respective ic manufacturers according to their own process characteristics and technical level. Therefore, different processes correspond to different design rules. Designers of integrated circuits typically design the layout of the integrated circuit according to design rules provided by the foundry of the semiconductor. Strict adherence to design rules can greatly avoid circuit failures and tolerances due to shorts, opens, and performance degradation due to parasitic effects. These rules provide the necessary information links for the circuit designer and process engineer during the generation phase.
Generally, the integrated circuit product design meeting the design rule can often obtain higher product yield, and the integrated circuit product design violating the design rule is prone to yield loss or even no yield. Therefore, before the ic product is taped out, design Rule Check (DRC) is needed to ensure that the layout Design of the product conforms to the Design Rule, so as to ensure that the ic product can obtain a high yield after tape-out. The main purpose of DRC is to check all physical verification processes in the layout that cause potential opens, shorts, or adverse effects due to violations of design rules.
A Script (Script) is an extension of a batch file, and is a program for storing plain text, and a general computer Script program is a combination of a predetermined series of operations for controlling a computer to perform an arithmetic operation, and can realize a certain logical branch or the like therein. In the development process of software, multiple developers are usually required to collaboratively complete the whole project. And after each developer completes respective task, submitting the script file respectively. When all script files for a project are completed, verification is required. The verification process is to actually execute all script files once, and once a script file failed to be executed exists, all the script files are verified to be failed.
Design rule check scripts are typically developed by a semiconductor foundry and provided to an integrated circuit designer for use. To ensure the accuracy of the design rule check script, it is usually necessary to test the script after it is developed. At present, the test of the design rule checking script is usually carried out on the actual layout of a product, but the layout of the actual product cannot contain all the graph structures defined in the design rule, so the test on the actual product has limitation, and the accuracy of the design rule checking script cannot be completely ensured.
Disclosure of Invention
According to the problems in the prior art, a method for verifying a design rule check script is provided, and aims to solve the problems that the existing design rule check script is limited in the test of an actual product and the accuracy of the design rule check script cannot be completely guaranteed, so that a test layout can contain all graphic structures defined in the design rule, the test of the design rule check script based on the test layout is comprehensive, and the accuracy of the design rule check script is guaranteed.
The technical scheme specifically comprises the following steps:
a method for verifying a design rule check script is provided, wherein the design rule check script comprises a plurality of layout design rules for layout test;
establishing a graphic unit library, wherein the graphic unit library comprises a plurality of graphic units of different types according with a preset graphic classification rule, and each graphic unit comprises a plurality of graphs which have different geometric characteristic relations and accord with the preset characteristic relation rule;
the authentication method further comprises the steps of:
step S1, extracting a plurality of graphic units of different categories from the graphic unit library according to the graphic classification rule;
s2, mapping the graphic units of the same category on the same layout, thereby forming a plurality of test layouts respectively associated with the graphic units of each category;
s3, sequentially carrying out verification test on the design rule check script on each test layout and generating a test result;
s4, judging whether the test result meets the feature relation rule corresponding to the graphic unit of the corresponding category;
if not, turning to the step S6;
s5, judging that the design rule check script passes the verification test of the test layout and issuing;
and S6, modifying the design rule checking script, and turning to the step S3.
Preferably, the layout design rule constrains the geometric size of the graph; the geometric dimensions include length, line width, perimeter, area, and spacing between the features.
Preferably, the graphs are divided into graphs of the same layer in the same process layer and graphs of different layers not in the same process layer according to the graph classification rule;
the geometric characteristic relation of the same-layer graphs comprises a distance;
the geometric feature relationships of the different layer figures comprise a spacing relationship, a surrounding relationship, an extending relationship and an overlapping relationship.
Preferably, the graphic classification rule includes a definition of the graphic shape;
according to the definition, the graphs are divided into orthogonal graphs, 45-degree-angle graphs and non-orthogonal non-45-degree-angle graphs;
the graphic units of the orthogonal graphics comprise orthogonal graphic units equal to the layout design rule, orthogonal graphic units smaller than the layout design rule and orthogonal graphic units larger than the layout design rule;
the graphic units of the 45-degree graphic comprise 45-degree graphic units equal to the layout design rule, 45-degree graphic units smaller than the layout design rule and 45-degree graphic units larger than the layout design rule;
the graphic units of the non-orthogonal non-45-degree angle graphic comprise non-orthogonal non-45-degree angle graphic units equal to the layout design rule, non-orthogonal non-45-degree angle graphic units smaller than the layout design rule and non-orthogonal non-45-degree angle graphic units larger than the layout design rule.
Preferably, the orthogonal pattern, the 45-degree angle pattern, and the non-orthogonal non-45-degree angle pattern of the same layer pattern further include: the distance between the graphics on the same layer is equal to the graphic unit of the layout design rule, the distance between the graphics on the same layer is smaller than the layout design rule and is not equal to 0, the distance between the graphics on the same layer is smaller than the layout design rule and is equal to 0, and the distance between the graphics on the same layer is larger than the layout design rule.
Preferably, the graphic units of the orthogonal pattern, the 45-degree angle pattern and the non-orthogonal non-45-degree angle pattern of the different layer patterns further include: the pattern units with different layer pattern spacing equal to the layout design rule, the pattern units with different layer pattern spacing smaller than the layout design rule and not equal to 0, the pattern units with different layer pattern spacing smaller than the layout design rule and equal to 0, and the pattern units with different layer pattern spacing larger than the layout design rule.
Preferably, the graphic units of the different layer graphics include: the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule, the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule and not equal to 0, and the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule and not equal to 0.
Preferably, the graphic unit of the different layer graphic further includes: the graphic extension of different layers is equal to the graphic unit of the layout design rule, the graphic unit of which the graphic extension of different layers is less than the layout design rule and the graphic unit of which the graphic extension of different layers is more than the layout design rule.
Preferably, the graphic unit of the different layer graphic further includes: the graph units with different layer graph overlapping equal to the layout design rule, the graph units with different layer graph overlapping less than the layout design rule and the graph units with different layer graph overlapping more than the layout design rule.
Preferably, the geometric feature relationships of the graphic units mapped on the test layout are the same.
Preferably, the geometric feature relationship between the graphics in the graphics unit further includes point-to-point, point-to-edge, edge-to-point, and edge-to-edge.
The beneficial effects of the above technical scheme are: the method for verifying the design rule check script can solve the problems that the existing design rule check script has limitation in the test of actual products and cannot completely ensure the accuracy of the design rule check script, so that the test layout can contain all graph structures defined in the design rule, the test of the design rule check script based on the test layout has comprehensiveness, and the accuracy of the design rule check script is ensured.
Drawings
FIG. 1 is a schematic flow chart illustrating a method for validating a design rule check script according to a preferred embodiment of the invention;
FIG. 2 is a diagram of a graph element of an orthogonal graph according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 3 is a diagram of a 45 degree graphic element in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of a non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle pattern of graphics units in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIGS. 5 (a) -5 (c) are schematic diagrams of a graphics unit for an orthogonal, 45 degree angle and non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle graphics for a same layer graphics in a preferred embodiment of the invention;
FIGS. 6 (a) -6 (c) are schematic diagrams of the graphic elements of the orthogonal, 45 degree angle and non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle patterns of the different layer patterns in accordance with the preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 7 is a diagram of a graph element in a different layer graph bounding relationship in a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating graphical elements in a graph extending relationship of different layers according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 9 is a diagram of graphics units in an overlay relationship of graphics of different layers in a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
Detailed Description
The technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention, and it is obvious that the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present invention, and not all of the embodiments. All other embodiments, which can be derived by a person skilled in the art from the embodiments given herein without making any creative effort, shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.
It should be noted that the embodiments and features of the embodiments may be combined with each other without conflict.
The invention is further described with reference to the following drawings and specific examples, which are not intended to be limiting.
Based on the above problems in the prior art, the present invention provides a method for verifying a design rule check script, which provides a design rule check script comprising a plurality of layout design rules for performing layout testing;
establishing a graphic unit library, wherein the graphic unit library comprises a plurality of graphic units of different types which accord with a preset graphic classification rule, and each graphic unit comprises a plurality of graphics which have different geometric characteristic relations and accord with the preset characteristic relation rule;
as shown in fig. 1, the verification method further includes the steps of:
the method comprises the following steps that S1, a plurality of graphic units of different types are extracted from a graphic unit library according to a graphic classification rule;
s2, mapping the graphic units of the same category on the same layout, thereby forming a plurality of test layouts respectively associated with the graphic units of each category;
s3, sequentially carrying out verification test on the design rule check script on each test layout and generating a test result;
s4, judging whether the test result conforms to the characteristic relation rule corresponding to the graphic unit of the corresponding category;
if not, turning to the step S6;
s5, judging that the design rule check script passes the verification test of the test layout and issuing;
and S6, modifying the design rule checking script, and turning to the step S3.
Specifically, the design rule checking script checks the layout design according to the layout design rule, and finds out the part which does not accord with the layout design rule in the layout design. In the embodiment of the invention, a plurality of graphs which have different geometric characteristic relations and accord with the preset characteristic relation rule generate a graph unit, and all the graph units form a graph unit library.
In the above embodiment, first, according to a graph classification rule, a plurality of graph units of different categories are extracted from a graph unit library; secondly, mapping the graphic units of the same category on the same layout, thereby forming a plurality of test layouts respectively associated with the graphic units of each category; sequentially carrying out verification test on the design rule check script on each test layout and generating a test result; if the test result accords with the characteristic relation rule corresponding to the graphic unit of the corresponding category, judging that the design rule checking script passes the verification test of the test layout and issuing; and if the test result does not accord with the characteristic relation rule corresponding to the graphic unit of the corresponding category, modifying the design rule check script, and sequentially carrying out verification test on the design rule check script on each test layout until the test result accords with the characteristic relation rule corresponding to the graphic unit of the corresponding category.
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, the layout design rule restricts the geometric dimension of the graph; the geometric dimensions include length, line width, perimeter, area, and spacing between the features.
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, the graphs are divided into the same-layer graphs in the same process layer and different-layer graphs not in the same process layer according to the graph classification rule;
the geometric characteristic relation of the same-layer graphs comprises a distance;
the geometric feature relationships of the different layer patterns include spacing, bounding, extending, and overlapping.
Specifically, the graphics are divided into the same layer graphics and different layer graphics. The layout design rules respectively define the mutual spacing between the same layer of patterns, the mutual spacing between different layers of patterns, the surrounding relation, the extending relation and the overlapping relation. One test layout comprises graphic units equal to the layout design rule, and/or graphic units larger than the layout design rule, and/or graphic units smaller than the layout design rule and not equal to 0, and/or graphic units smaller than the layout design rule and equal to 0.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the graph classification rule includes a definition of a graph shape;
according to the definition, the graphs are divided into orthogonal graphs, 45-degree-angle graphs and non-orthogonal non-45-degree-angle graphs; providing an X-Y rectangular coordinate axis, wherein each side of the orthogonal graph is parallel or vertical to the coordinate axis; the 45-degree angle graph at least has one side with an included angle of 45 degrees with the coordinate axis; the non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle pattern has at least one side which is neither parallel to nor perpendicular to the coordinate axis and has an included angle not equal to 45 degrees.
As shown in fig. 2, the orthogonal pattern units include an orthogonal pattern unit equal to the layout design rule, an orthogonal pattern unit smaller than the layout design rule, and an orthogonal pattern unit larger than the layout design rule;
as shown in fig. 3, the 45-degree pattern units include 45-degree pattern units equal to the layout design rule, 45-degree pattern units smaller than the layout design rule, and 45-degree pattern units larger than the layout design rule;
as shown in fig. 4, the pattern units of the non-orthogonal non-45 degree pattern include a non-orthogonal non-45 degree pattern unit equal to the layout design rule, a non-orthogonal non-45 degree pattern unit smaller than the layout design rule, and a non-orthogonal non-45 degree pattern unit larger than the layout design rule.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, as shown in fig. 5 (a) -5 (c), the graphic units of the orthogonal pattern, the 45-degree angle pattern and the non-orthogonal non-45-degree angle pattern of the same layer pattern further respectively include: the graph units with the same layer graph spacing equal to the layout design rule, the graph units with the same layer graph spacing smaller than the layout design rule and not equal to 0, the graph units with the same layer graph spacing smaller than the layout design rule and equal to 0 and the graph units with the same layer graph spacing larger than the layout design rule.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, as shown in fig. 6 (a) -6 (c), the graphic units of the orthogonal pattern, the 45 degree angle pattern and the non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle pattern of the different layer patterns further respectively include: the graphic units with different layer graphic spacing equal to the layout design rule, the graphic units with different layer graphic spacing smaller than the layout design rule and not equal to 0, the graphic units with different layer graphic spacing smaller than the layout design rule and equal to 0, and the graphic units with different layer graphic spacing larger than the layout design rule.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, as shown in fig. 7, the graphic units of different layer graphics further include: the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule, the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule and not equal to 0, and the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule and not equal to 0.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, as shown in fig. 8, the graphic units of different layer graphics further include: the graphic extension of different layers is equal to the graphic unit of the layout design rule, the graphic unit of which the graphic extension of different layers is less than the layout design rule and the graphic unit of which the graphic extension of different layers is more than the layout design rule.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, as shown in fig. 9, the graphic units of different layer graphics further include: the graph units with different layer graph overlapping equal to the layout design rule, the graph units with different layer graph overlapping less than the layout design rule and the graph units with different layer graph overlapping more than the layout design rule.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the geometric feature relationships of the graphic units mapped on the test layout are the same.
Specifically, the graphic units with the same geometric feature relationship may be mapped on the same layout to form a test layout for performing script verification testing.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the geometric feature relationships between graphics in a graphics unit further include point-to-point, point-to-edge, edge-to-point, and edge-to-edge.
Specifically, the graphic unit includes a target graphic, and the point-to-point geometric feature relationship means that a vertex of the target graphic is opposite to a vertex of another graphic; the geometric characteristic relation of point-to-edge means that the vertex of the target graph is opposite to the edge of another graph; the geometric characteristic relation of the edge to the point means that the edge of the target graph is opposite to the vertex of another graph; edge-to-edge geometric feature relationships refer to the edge of a target graphic opposing the edge of another graphic.
While the invention has been described with reference to a preferred embodiment, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and detail may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
Claims (11)
1. A method for verifying a design rule check script is characterized by providing a design rule check script, wherein the design rule check script comprises a plurality of layout design rules for layout test;
establishing a graphic unit library, wherein the graphic unit library comprises a plurality of graphic units of different types according with a preset graphic classification rule, and each graphic unit comprises a plurality of graphs which have different geometric characteristic relations and accord with the preset characteristic relation rule;
further comprising the steps of:
step S1, extracting a plurality of graphic units of different categories from the graphic unit library according to the graphic classification rule;
s2, mapping the graphic units of the same category on the same layout, thereby forming a plurality of test layouts respectively associated with the graphic units of each category;
s3, sequentially carrying out verification test on the design rule check script on each test layout and generating a test result;
s4, judging whether the test result meets the feature relation rule corresponding to the graphic unit of the corresponding category;
if not, turning to the step S6;
s5, judging that the design rule check script passes the verification test of the test layout and issuing;
and S6, modifying the design rule checking script, and turning to the step S3.
2. The method of validating a design rule check script of claim 1, wherein the layout design rule constrains a geometric dimension of the graph; the geometric dimensions include length, line width, perimeter, area, and spacing between the features.
3. The method for validating design rule check script as claimed in claim 1, wherein the patterns are divided into patterns of a same layer in a same process layer and patterns of different layers not in the same process layer according to the pattern classification rule;
the geometric characteristic relation among the same layer of graphs comprises a distance;
the geometrical feature relationships between the different layer patterns comprise a spacing, a surrounding relationship, an extending relationship and an overlapping relationship.
4. The method of validating design rule check script of claim 3, wherein the graphic classification rule includes a definition of the graphic shape;
according to the definition, the graphs are divided into orthogonal graphs, 45-degree-angle graphs and non-orthogonal non-45-degree-angle graphs;
the graphic units of the orthogonal graphics comprise orthogonal graphic units equal to the layout design rule, orthogonal graphic units smaller than the layout design rule and orthogonal graphic units larger than the layout design rule;
the graphic units of the 45-degree graphic comprise 45-degree graphic units equal to the layout design rule, 45-degree graphic units smaller than the layout design rule and 45-degree graphic units larger than the layout design rule;
the non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle graph the graphic element is including being equal to the non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle graphic element of domain design rule, be less than the non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle graphic element of domain design rule and be greater than the non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle graphic element of domain design rule.
5. The method for validating design rule check script as claimed in claim 4, wherein the graphic elements of the orthogonal graphic, the 45 degree angle graphic and the non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle graphic of the same layer graphic respectively comprise: the distance between the graphics on the same layer is equal to the graphic unit of the layout design rule, the distance between the graphics on the same layer is smaller than the layout design rule and is not equal to 0, the distance between the graphics on the same layer is smaller than the layout design rule and is equal to 0, and the distance between the graphics on the same layer is larger than the layout design rule.
6. The method for validating design rule check script as claimed in claim 4, wherein the graphic elements of the orthogonal graphic, the 45 degree angle graphic and the non-orthogonal non-45 degree angle graphic of the different layer graphic respectively comprise: the pattern units with different layer pattern spacing equal to the layout design rule, the pattern units with different layer pattern spacing smaller than the layout design rule and not equal to 0, the pattern units with different layer pattern spacing smaller than the layout design rule and equal to 0, and the pattern units with different layer pattern spacing larger than the layout design rule.
7. The method of validating design rule check script as defined in claim 4, wherein the graphics unit of the different layer of graphics further comprises: the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule, the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule and not equal to 0, and the graph units with different layers of graphs enclosing the layout design rule and not equal to 0.
8. The method of validating design rule check script as defined in claim 4, wherein the graphics unit of the different layer of graphics further comprises: the graphic units with different layer graphic extensions equal to the layout design rule, the graphic units with different layer graphic extensions smaller than the layout design rule and the graphic units with different layer graphic extensions larger than the layout design rule.
9. The method of validating design rule check scripts as claimed in claim 4, wherein the graphics units of the different layer graphics further include: and the graphics unit with different layer graphics overlapping equal to the layout design rule, the graphics unit with different layer graphics overlapping less than the layout design rule and the graphics unit with different layer graphics overlapping more than the layout design rule.
10. The method of validating design rule check scripts of claim 1, wherein the geometric feature relationships of the graphic elements mapped on the test layout are the same.
11. The method of validating design rule check scripts of claim 1, wherein the geometric feature relationships between the graphics in the graphic elements further include point-to-point, point-to-edge, edge-to-point, and edge-to-edge.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201811408981.8A CN109543308B (en) | 2018-11-23 | 2018-11-23 | Method for verifying design rule check script |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201811408981.8A CN109543308B (en) | 2018-11-23 | 2018-11-23 | Method for verifying design rule check script |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN109543308A CN109543308A (en) | 2019-03-29 |
| CN109543308B true CN109543308B (en) | 2023-01-31 |
Family
ID=65849813
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201811408981.8A Active CN109543308B (en) | 2018-11-23 | 2018-11-23 | Method for verifying design rule check script |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN109543308B (en) |
Families Citing this family (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN113534604B (en) | 2020-03-31 | 2023-11-24 | 长鑫存储技术有限公司 | Mark detection method, mark detection device and computer readable storage medium |
| CN112560387A (en) * | 2020-12-14 | 2021-03-26 | 南京华大九天科技有限公司 | Mask design rule checking method, tool and storage medium |
| CN113627122B (en) * | 2021-08-12 | 2024-01-23 | 长鑫存储技术有限公司 | Verification method, device and equipment of test pattern and storage medium |
| CN115705462A (en) | 2021-08-13 | 2023-02-17 | 长鑫存储技术有限公司 | DRC test pattern generation method and device, electronic equipment and storage medium |
| CN114297738A (en) * | 2021-12-28 | 2022-04-08 | 全芯智造技术有限公司 | Method and apparatus for generating key images |
Family Cites Families (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JPH09288686A (en) * | 1996-04-22 | 1997-11-04 | Toshiba Corp | Layout pattern design standard / verification rule creation support method and system |
| CN103164552B (en) * | 2011-12-13 | 2015-08-05 | 中芯国际集成电路制造(上海)有限公司 | The detection method of chip layout |
| CN103164566A (en) * | 2012-12-04 | 2013-06-19 | 天津蓝海微科技有限公司 | Vector testing auxiliary layer generating method of territory validation rule |
| CN103268375B (en) * | 2013-05-08 | 2016-07-06 | 中国科学院微电子研究所 | Checking and verifying method for layout design rule of standard cell library |
| US9934349B2 (en) * | 2015-03-26 | 2018-04-03 | Nxp Usa, Inc. | Method for verifying design rule checks |
| CN105825036B (en) * | 2016-06-07 | 2019-10-15 | 中国科学院微电子研究所 | A method and system for optimizing layout design rules |
-
2018
- 2018-11-23 CN CN201811408981.8A patent/CN109543308B/en active Active
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CN109543308A (en) | 2019-03-29 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN109543308B (en) | Method for verifying design rule check script | |
| US6804808B2 (en) | Redundant via rule check in a multi-wide object class design layout | |
| US6732338B2 (en) | Method for comprehensively verifying design rule checking runsets | |
| US7039892B2 (en) | Systems and methods for ensuring correct connectivity between circuit designs | |
| US10691868B1 (en) | Process for analyzing printed circuit board and packaging manufacturing design rules | |
| US8984459B2 (en) | Methods and apparatus for layout verification | |
| US10628550B2 (en) | Method for designing an integrated circuit, and method of manufacturing the integrated circuit | |
| US20040019862A1 (en) | Structure and method for separating geometries in a design layout into multi-wide object classes | |
| US6895568B2 (en) | Correction of spacing violations between pure fill via areas in a multi-wide object class design layout | |
| US20040064795A1 (en) | Via enclosure rule check in a multi-wide object class design layout | |
| US20140337810A1 (en) | Modular platform for integrated circuit design analysis and verification | |
| US20210049315A1 (en) | Methods and systems to perform automated integrated fan-out wafer level package routing | |
| US7900178B2 (en) | Integrated circuit (IC) design method, system and program product | |
| KR102419645B1 (en) | Computer-implemented method and computing system for designing integrated circuit and method of manufacturing integrated circuit | |
| US7076750B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for generating trenches for vias | |
| US20140130001A1 (en) | Method of Reducing Parasitic Mismatch | |
| JP4177123B2 (en) | Wiring pattern verification method, program and apparatus | |
| CN112347735B (en) | Standard cell detection method and generation method, medium and equipment | |
| CN113935271A (en) | Automatic layout and wiring method | |
| CN118862797B (en) | Method, system and storage medium for adding vent holes in chip carrier | |
| CN115587569B (en) | Method, system and storage medium for checking design rule of chip layout | |
| US11972192B2 (en) | Superseding design rule check (DRC) rules in a DRC-correct interactive router | |
| US8751988B1 (en) | Computer-implemented methods and systems for automatic generation of layout versus schematic (LVS) rule files and regression test data suites | |
| CN116187253A (en) | Layout Versus Schematic (LVS) device extraction using pattern matching | |
| CN115438622A (en) | Evaluation system and evaluation method for product layout |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |