标签: switching

Engineering choices are usually initially dictated by conventional wisdom—after all, who has time to examine every assumption, given the pressures of time-to-market and product margins? This is true in all niches of design, including the vital and very vibrant power-related sector. While we make basic assumptions as a starting point in the design process, it can lead to decisions based on widely held ideas which are perhaps no longer entirely valid, and thus may unnecessarily constrain design options.   Here's one example: I really like low-dropout regulators (LDOs). They do so much, solve so many local power-rail problems, are so easy to use, come in so many varieties that you can almost always find one that meets your requirements, and many of them are available from multiple sources. What's not to like? Further, they are inherently low-noise DC sources, a very critical parameter in some situation. Billions are used every year, often "dropped in" close to a load to solve a local regulation issue after the initial power-distribution approach falls short.   Consider a design which needs a very low-noise DC rail. A common immediate response is to say "we'll have to use an LDO despite its inefficiency, because switchers are known to be too noisy.” Well…maybe yes, may not—it depends on the noise level you can accept. While you may need a "low noise" rail, the real issue is how low of a rail you really need and what will it cost.   If you step back and look closely at the low-noise objective compared to what's available in both switching regulators and LDOs, you may find a switcher with noise that is low enough to meet the specifics of your design situation. Keep in mind that IC vendors recognize that switchers can be noisy, so they have developed using clever topologies and designs to bring that noise down. For example, the LT8640 from Linear Technology is a 42-V input/5-A output switching regulator designed for extremely low -noise output; it can even pass the strict automotive CISPR25, Class 5 peak limits (below).     Sometimes, a reverse of the conventional wisdom of the switcher versus LDO story also needs to be examined. Rather than the specifications of the part guiding the choice, some unique aspects of the application may be the determining factor.   If efficiency is a goal – as it often is – the natural reaction is to think automatically "switching regulator" rather than LDO, since the LDOs are almost always less efficient that a well-designed switcher with comparable output.   But the choice may also depend on duty cycle and turn-on/off issues rather than innovative, improved component design. For example, the application note "Multi-string LED lighting systems and the top four linear regulator questions" from Texas Instruments shows that LDOs can be just as efficient as the switcher in some circumstances, and at lower cost, in some design scenarios.   There are similar stories with power-related components and configurations which are often but not always true, with regard to sense resistors, grounding, high-side versus low-side, sensing and sense resistors, four-wire remote-output sensing, fuses and circuit protection, among other design situations.   It's human nature to get into a mental groove (or rut, depending on your point of view), and it may take a conscious effort to step back and re-examine the situation and assumptions. However, doing so can result in a better design, often at lower cost. It's not a matter of doing an unconventional design as much as questioning conventional wisdom.   Have you ever had to challenge the easy path of conventional wisdom, whether power-related or not? How did that experience go?

与被用于在今天的芯片越来越多频时钟，特别是在通信领域中，经常有必要在芯片运行的同时切换的时钟线的来源。这通常是通过在硬件中复用两个不同的频率的时钟源通过控制内部逻辑多路复用器选择线实现。 两个时钟的频率可能是完全无关的彼此或者它们可以是彼此的倍数。在这两种情况下，在开关的时候有时钟毛刺产生。时钟线上毛刺危害整个系统，因为毛刺可能被一些寄存器误以为时捕获延。   在这篇文章中，两种不同的避免干扰的方法。第一种方法处理时钟之间是倍数关系，第二处理时钟完全无关彼此。 原文：http://www.design-reuse.com/articles/5827/techniques-to-make-clock-switching-glitch-free.html http://wenku.baidu.com/link?url=xp4KTPQTTO6xQcKD32h7v_Eq0-qLZenkHQsjTrBWCxOQWzHuJggFSHKTYCyPZt5ZcdUyZL_qGT_UF10KYX_3HR-SIDGNapCmlqpbf-aPclK The problem with on-the-fly clock switching Figure 1 shows a simple implementation of a clock switch, using an AND-OR type multiplexer logic. The multiplexer has one control signal, named SELECT, which either propagates CLK0 to the output when set to “zero” or propagates CLK1 to the output when set to “one." A glitch may be caused due to immediate switching of the output from Current Clock source to the Next Clock source, when the SELECT value changes. Current Clock is the clock source currently selected while Next Clock is the clock source corresponding to the new SELECT value. The timing diagram in Figure 1 shows how a glitch is generated at the output, OUT CLOCK, when the SELECT control signal changes. The problem with this kind of switch is that the switch control signal can change any time with respect to the source clocks, thus creating a potential for chopping the output clock or creating a glitch at the output. The select control signal is most likely generated by a register driven by either of the two source clocks, which means that either it has a known timing relationship to both clocks, if both clocks are multiples of each other, or it may be asynchronous to at least one clock, if source clocks are not related in any way. Switching during either clock's high state needs to be avoided without having any idea about the frequencies or phase relationship of these clocks. Fixed delay can be used to induce the gap between the start and stop time of the two source clocks, but only if a fixed relationship exists between the two clock sources. It cannot be used where either the input frequencies are not known, or the clocks are not related.   Glitch protection for related clock sources A solution to prevent glitch at the output of a clock switch where source clocks are multiples of each other is presented in Fi gure 2. A negative edge triggered D flip-flop is inserted in the selection path for each of the clock sources. Registering the selection control at negative edge of the clock, along with enabling the selection only after other clock is de-selected first, provides excellent protection against glitches at the output. Registering the select signal at negative edge of the clock guarantees that no changes occur at the output while either of the clocks is at high level, thus protecting against chopping the output clock. Feedback from one clock's selection to the other enables the switch to wait for de-selection of the Current Clock before starting the propagation of the Next Clock, avoiding any glitches. The figure 2 timing diagram shows how the transition of the SELECT signal from 0 to 1 first stops propagation of CLK0 to the output at the proceeding falling edge of CLK0, then starts the propagation of CLK1 to the output at following negative edge of CLK1. There are three timing paths in this circuit that need special consideration — the SELECT control signal to either one of the two negative edge triggered flip flops, the output of DFF0 to input of DFF1, and the output of DFF1 to the input of DFF0. If the signal on any of these three paths changes at the same time as the capturing edge of the destination flip flop's clock, there is a small chance that the output of that register may become meta-stable, meaning it may go to a state between an ideal “one” and an ideal “zero.” A meta-stable state can be interpreted differently by the clock multiplexer and the enable feedback of the other flip flop. Therefore, it is required that capturing edges of both flip flops and the launch edge of the SELECT signal should be set apart from each other to avoid any asynchronous interfacing. This can be easily accomplished by using proper multi-cycle hold constraints or minimum delay constraints, as the timing relationship is known between the two clocks.   Figure2 -- Glitch-free clock switching for related clocks Fault tolerance At chip startup time, both flip flops DFF0 and DFF1 should be reset to the “zero” state so that neither one of the clocks is propagated initially. By starting both flip flops in “zero” state, fault tolerance is built into the clock switch. Let's say that one of the clocks was not toggling due to a fault at startup time. If the flip flop associated with the faulty clock had started up in “one” state, it would prevent the selection of other clock as the Next Clock, and its own state is not changeable due to lack of a running clock. By starting both flip flops in “zero” state, even if one of the source clocks is not running, there is still the ability to propagate the other good clock to the output of the switch. Glitch protection for unrelated clock sources The previous method of avoiding a glitch at the output of a clock switch requires the two cl ock sources to be multiples of each other, such that user can avoid signals to be asynchronous with either one of the clock domains. There is no mechanism to handle asynchronous signals in that implementation. This leads to the second method of implementing the clock switch with synchronizer circuits to avoid potential meta-stability caused by asynchronous signals. The source of asynchronous behavior could either the be SELECT signal or the feedback from one clock domain to the other, when the two clock sources are totally unrelated to each other. As shown in Figure 3, protection is provided against meta-stability by adding one extra stage of positive edge triggered flip flop for each of the clock sources. The positive edge triggered flip flop in each of the selection paths, along with the existing negative edge triggered flip flop, guards against potential meta-stability, which may be caused by asynchronous SELECT signal or asynchronous feedback from one clock domain to the other. A synchroniz er is simply two stages of flip flops, where the first stage helps stabilize data by latching it and later passing it on to the next stage to be interpreted by rest of the circuit.   Figure 3 -- Glitch-free clock switching for unrelated clocks Conclusion The hazard of generating a glitch on a clock line while switching between clock sources can be avoided with very little overhead by using the design techniques presented in this article. These techniques are fully scalable and can be extended to a clock switch for more than two clocks. For multiple clock sources, the select signal for each clock source will be enabled by feedback from all the other sources. Rafey Mahmud is a member of technical staff at Altera Corp. He has worked on several microprocessor and ASIC design projects.