Why not allow user to specify netlist and physical change file name separately?
Writing an eco change from XTop will allow a file prefix to be created, but the netlist will be spit out together with the physical document because it is easier to tell which two documents are a set and will not be confusing.
Why cannot the icc eco command written by split net be used?
By default, XTop will output the macro command, but the ICC insert inverter does not actually support split net, you need to switch to write-atomic command.
xtop> write_design_changes ... -write_atomic_cmd
Why should the pt file output a physical file?
The reason is that the customer may give the same ICC and PT eco script prefix. If the previously generated ICC's eco script is physical, but later generated the PT format, the client directly sources the netlist and the previous physical file in the PT, and will report an error. So in order to avoid this kind of confusion, we will output physical at the default output.
About third-party tools to source eco script problems
soc:
soc macro: not supported, xtop writes out the inno*
soc atomic: load netlist is no problem; source physical is no problem
inno*:
inno* macro: source netlist and physical are no problem
inno* atomic: There is a problem (report bug.53683), load netlistreport error.
ICC:
ICC macro: source netlist, net cross module when split net, report error (see bug.47704)
ICC atomic: source netlist is no problem, source physical is also no problem (wrap does not find drcproblem)
====== 返回目录 ======
<<< 上一章：Interactive ECO
>>> 下一章：Reports & Debugging
