Multi-Site Design Data Management Report 2014

Shiv Sikand, IC Manage

Introduction

IC Manage’s 5th annual Design and IP Management survey report compiles results of an independent, blind survey on multi-site design executed during March and April 2014. This report focuses closely on multi-site design and verification across the enterprise, including both digital and custom/analog design.

A total of 372 engineering professionals responded, with approximately half in management roles. By analyzing this comprehensive feedback, we can better understand key trends for this business and technology area.

Survey methodology and demographics

1.1 Survey Methodology

A blind, anonymous survey was emailed to several thousand SoC/IC design professionals worldwide by an independent firm during March and April of 2014. 372 engineers and managers completed the survey online.

1.2 Respondent Job Functions

Based on prior year surveys to this same target audience, approximately half of respondents held positions in engineering, verification, project or CAD management; the remainder were a mix of designers and verification engineers.

Internal IP Reuse Modification Policy and Drivers

2.1 Organizational Policy on IP Reuse Modification

There is a wide variation in organizational policies regarding how much modification is allowed for internal IP.  Only 13% of organizations have a ‘do not touch’ IP reuse policy.

In contrast, 87% allow some modifications.  Only 19% allow designers to freely modify all the internal IP, while almost half of the organizations apply some mixture of policies, depending on the IP.

Multi-Site Design14-1

2.2 Internal IP Reuse Drivers

In the 2013 survey, we saw that approximately 60 percent of companies had internal incentives for IP design and verification reuse for development teams.

Multi-Site Design14-2

As shown above, the 2014 survey found a very balanced breakdown of how internal reuse is achieved, with one-third each where it is being driven 1) by top down directives, 2) by designer choice or 3) by a balance of the two.

Design Data Management systems deployed within organizations

3.1 Number of different IP/DDM systems deployed within organizations

55 percent of companies deploy more than one design data management system. One reason for the disparate systems is that they have legacy systems following major acquisitions – if only a small team is acquired, it is generally more common to move the incoming engineers to one system.

Multi-Site Design14-3

3.2 Multi-system Integration Status 

The majority of companies with multiple IP/DDM system desired better integration between their DM systems. A strong integration is critical when two design communities with two systems are participating in the same project, for example, to allow better sharing of IP across the enterprise.

Multi-Site Design14-4

Top Priorities for Design & IP Management

The top features sought in a DM system were revision history and traceability, followed by project management and status reporting.

The second tier items were configuration management, bug dependency management, internal IP reuse support and multi-site performance and branching and merging.

As you can see below, beyond these top tier features, companies had a broad range of requirements.

Multi-Site Design14-5

Multi-site Design & IP Management

5.1 Portion of companies doing multi-site design

82 percent of organizations are developing and verifying designs across more than one site.

Multi-Site Design14-6

5.2 Multi-site design priorities

The top two features desired for design & IP management are 1) Global visibility into designs and updates (61%), where companies want global visibility into what designs are available and where they are in the development cycle, and 2) Monitor all IP reuse into designs and updates (60%), as companies seek global visibility into what designs are available and where they are in the development cycle.

Multi-Site Design14-7

The second tier functions desired were remote site performance, to help with efficiency and frequency of checkins, as well as bug interdependency management to help mitigate some of the complexities.

Security Issues with File-Based Access Control Systems

Close to 70 percent of respondents cited security challenges with their company’s file-based access control system. This is greater than twice the number that did not recognize any problems, and is due in part to the fact that content which needs to be tightly controlled is distributed across multiple sites.

Multi-Site Design14-8

Their challenges ranged from managing security across multiple operating systems such as Windows, Linux, and Mac, to managing engineering teams at remote sites, to audits, and government compliance. Additionally there were limitations with assigning directory-level permissions across multiple projects and geographies.

Summary

More than eight out of ten companies now have multiple design sites. Further, due to multiple factors, the majority of companies also have at least two different design and IP management systems. These factors result in growing interdependencies between teams.

To enable a reliable and productive design process, companies will need to further integrate their design and IP management technology and processes to achieve a global design view, while making local and remote sites equally efficient.

Internal reuse is being driven by a balance of top down directives and designer choice.  87 percent of organizations allow some modifications to IP.  Only 19 percent allow designers to freely modify all the internal IP, while almost half of the organizations apply some mixture of policies, depending on the IP. 13 percent of organizations have a ‘do not touch’ IP reuse policy.

The most sought after features in a design and IP management system were revision history and traceability, followed by project management and status reporting. The second tier items were configuration management, bug dependency management, internal IP reuse support and multi-site performance and branching and merging.

Close to 70 percent of respondents cited security challenges with their company’s file-based access control system.

About IC Manage, Inc.

IC Manage provides high performance design data and IP management solutions for companies to efficiently complete designs across their global enterprises. Design teams using IC Manage improve product quality, designer productivity, and global collaboration, while maximizing their IP reuse. IC

Manage customers include Altera, AMD, Broadcom, CSR, Cypress, Entropic, Juniper, Maxim, MediaTek NVIDIA, Rambus, Samsung, Sandisk, Xilinx and other top semiconductor and systems companies. IC Manage is headquartered at 2105 South Bascom Ave., Suite 120, Campbell, CA. For more information visit us at www.icmanage.com.

Shiv Sikand, Vice President of Engineering, IC Manage

Shiv Sikand is founder and Vice President of Engineering at IC Manage, and has been instrumental in achieving its technology leadership in design and IP management for the past 11 years. Shiv has collaborated with semiconductor leaders such as Cypress, Broadcom, Maxim, NVIDIA, AMD, Altera, and Xilinx in deploying IC Manage’s infrastructure to enable enterprise-wide design methodologies for current and next generation process nodes.

Shiv has deep expertise in design and IP management, with a long history of developing innovative solutions in this field. He started in the mid 1990’s during the MIPS processor era at SGI, authoring the MIPS Circuit Checker before specializing on design management tools for a number of advanced startups, including Velio Communications and Matrix Semiconductor, before founding IC Manage in 2003.

Shiv received his BSc and MSc degrees in Physics and Electrical Engineering from the University of Manchester. He did his postgraduate research in Computer Science also at Manchester University, where he worked on the AMULET team building the world’s first asynchronous ARM microprocessor with Prof. Steve Furber, the original inventor of the ARM.

###

2017-02-03T20:09:17+00:00