Augusto Berndt
Augusto Berndt
> [@gudeh](https://github.com/gudeh) I'd like to know why routability isn't making any progress. There appears to be room for spreading the cells out. > > When this fails we should distinguish...
For debug mode with SC artifact: For adding -gui: `sc_issue_darkriscv_job0_ihp130_sg13g2_stdcell_place/build/darkriscv/job0_ihp130_sg13g2_stdcell/place.global/0/replay.sh` For adding global_placement_debug: `sc_issue_darkriscv_job0_ihp130_sg13g2_stdcell_place/build/darkriscv/job0_ihp130_sg13g2_stdcell/sc_collected_files/scripts_47796b273299036fb7ff7ec933bb5669cfd57b7c/common/procs.tcl`
I tried increasing the inflation parameters with different values, but we do not seem to improve routing congestion even inflating more. The following image is from a run where I...
In summary I understand we do not reduce RUDY congestion even with cells being more spread out.
ah, well remembered. We do not remove filler gcells to compensate for the extra area, instead [we increase the density](https://github.com/The-OpenROAD-Project/OpenROAD/blob/a5f487c9b4d6e18d0fbee424e31e16aef98d3abe/src/gpl/src/routeBase.cpp#L674-L680). Maybe this is one more reason to focus on removal...
The run with increase inflation we go from 0.1935 to 0.2383 due to all inflation. And to 0.261 due to timing-driven non-virtual iterations afterwards.
> Increasing the density moves in the opposite direction to inflation so that makes it less likely to work. What are the issues to instance removal? Fillers are stored in...
[In this branch](https://github.com/The-OpenROAD-Project/OpenROAD/compare/master...gudeh:OpenROAD:gpl-filler-gcell-removal) I implemented the removal of fillers and used it in routability instead of increasing density. I would like to test this with the design from this issue,...
I tried both ways, replacing all occurrences of "source -echo" for "source", and replacing "source" for "import" in all TCL files and both attempts resulted in an error, unfortunately.