Las Vegas, NV - June 17, 2001 -- An interoperability workshop at DAC, trying to decide how to deploy a standard application programming interface (API), promoted open-source adoption and also witnessed a Mentor Graphic presenter accuse Cadence Design Systems of failing to deliver on a promised technology grant.

The workshop format consisted of a variety of EDA tool users and vendors, each of whom had a chance to share thei perspective on the viability of a standard interface for EDA tools to produce tight coupling between tools. After, the vendors and users returned to sit on a panel and take questions from the audience.

Workshop organizer John Darringer, manager of system-design at IBM, framed the discussion by stating, "There's a new type of design system evolving with a lot of models sharing data in memory - where are we getting these [models]? Will it be a totally integrated system from one vendor or a composite system? This is a difficult task."

Users agree on necessity of standard API, caution against past mistakes
Dave Lackey of IBM pointed out the need for interfaces at the data model level to enable the tight integration of the best function set. "IBM can expand internal capabilities, but this isn't practical though, because of support issues," Lackey said. "A better solution is to use an industry standard API; and this way EDA vendors don't have to worry about as much competition from customers-they just need to push this open API standard."

Yi-hung Chee, principal engineer for CAD Infrastructure at Intel, said that Intel would support an open API standard, but such a standard would need reference implementation and support from EDA tool vendors.

Jim Wilmore, CAD System Architect at HP, echoed these sentiments - "open source is absolutely necessary," Wilmore said. However, Wilmore cautioned against a standards effort similar to the CADFramework Initiative (CFI), as this shared architecture "didn't come of anything."

Sumit Dasgupta, director of SOC-IP design systems at Motorola, commented that he doesn't want to develop internal tools and suggested a unified EDA vendor front to start the API model. "The API should be vendor neutral and shouldn't be expensive," Dasgupta said." Dasgupta added, "[the vendor and user community] have to get academia involved as well."

Not a technical issue?
When the EDA vendors discussed their views, the discussion took a political turn when presenter Greg Dufour, member of the strategic technology advancement group at Mentor Graphics Group, accused Cadence Design Systems of backing out of an agreement to deliver open-source technology to the open access community (OAC), a standard group Dufour belongs to, by July 2001. Dufour began his presentation by stating "this is a political question, not a technical one." After pointing out the folly of a "single, monolithic flow" and praising the efforts of standards body, Si2, Dufour spoke of his frustration with Cadence by stating, "Time to air the dirty laundry, this isn't the first time; I just want to see Cadence do the right thing." When asked to elaborate further on his statement, Dufour declined to comment.

Other tool vendors did share Dufour's political view. Shir-shen Chang of Synopsys said, "A standardized API database isn't a new thing, we've done this before, this isn't just a technical discussion, it's a business discussion as well." Chang agreed with the users' perspective that the API should be an open-source one, "I want it open source from the outset; a gated community is beautiful on the inside, but it doesn't communicate well with the outside world."

Mark Bales, corporate fellow at Cadence Design Systems, said "Interoperability tries to accomplish a unified tool flow out of tools from different vendors and most of the problems are between the tools - data isn't represented the same way." Bales also stressed that a common reference implementation is just as essential as a common API. Later, Bales, when asked about his reaction to Dufour's accusation, didn't comment on the matter.

Compromise is needed
In the panel section of the presentation, Don Cattrell, vp at Si2, spoke to the audience about the Si2 effort to come up with an open source API. Cattrell noted that Si2 had 11 members consisting of tool users and vendors and presented its goals as having an open standard IC design model and to adopt a standard across the EDA industry with help from academia. "The Big IC [companies] partner and co-design often, this makes interoperability even more important, "Cattrell added. Cattrell said that Si2 had recently selected technology from a "major EDA company," and a public announcement and push for open-source adoption would be following "this week."

In later discussion, panel moderator Richard Goering of EE Times posed the question to the tool users, "Would you withhold buying tools, if they didn't use an API?" Gupta responded, "I think it's impractical to wake up one morning and say [to the tool vendors] 'You're out.' Designs must go on."

An audience member pointed out that "the reason committee-based standards went wrong [in previous open-source API efforts] is that they were too broad and did not compromise enough. You have to compromise to make this work."