Forum Discussion
Two HBM2 instances with single I/O PLL
- 6 years ago
Hi Michael,
Thanks for the confirmation.
If IOPLL from own user logic, you may share it as long it provides your design fits and closes timing.
The drawback of resource sharing is always problem with design timing closure because you need to use same PLL to clock too many destinations in the design. Once the clock signal travel too far, it will become jittery and impact the timing. That is why sharing resources is not a recommendation.
But, you can evaluate your design using Timequest and see is there any timing closure impact or not. If everything is fine, then I don’t see any problem sharing the IOPLL.
Hope this explanation helps. 😊
Thanks
Regards,
Aida
Hi Michael,
Thanks for the confirmation.
If IOPLL from own user logic, you may share it as long it provides your design fits and closes timing.
The drawback of resource sharing is always problem with design timing closure because you need to use same PLL to clock too many destinations in the design. Once the clock signal travel too far, it will become jittery and impact the timing. That is why sharing resources is not a recommendation.
But, you can evaluate your design using Timequest and see is there any timing closure impact or not. If everything is fine, then I don’t see any problem sharing the IOPLL.
Hope this explanation helps. 😊
Thanks
Regards,
Aida
Due I want to run HBM2 with maximum frequency I'll instantiated a main (upstream) IOPLL with two sub (downstream) IOPLLs to achieve best timing closure.
Thanks a lot for your explanation! 🙂