Clocking tree
Closed this issue · 13 comments
There are several issues regarding clocking tree for AFCZ:
- it is quite complex what makes it not really straightforward to use,
- CERN has some requirements, that seem not to be met at the moment (will be discussed in the following comments to this issue)
- some unification with AFC4 clocking tree may be considered (taking into account presence of SoC)
As a starting point for the discussion let's take a diagram (hopefully accurate) of the current AFCZ clocking tree:
If one wants to modify this diagram yEd source is here.
I would get rid of:
Si5324 - it will be replaced by DDMTD anyway
SY89540 and replace it by assembly option as in AFCv4
TCLKC and TCLKD optionally as an assembly option or not use at all.
Rev 1:
- I believe it includes CERN suggestions
- FMC clocking unified with AFCv4
- RTM clocking for DESY Zone 3 Recommendation Class D1.4
If one wants to modify this diagram yEd source is here.
.
May I start implementing Rev.1 to schematics?
It would be great if @gkasprow would approve it, but I think you can start implementing it.
You can swap clock matrix ports according to the layout constraints.
Looks good to me. Go ahead.
CERN reports that for their application a simultaneous use of:
- GTP8-11_CLK connected to clock matrix and
- MGT226 fed with WR clock.
Suggested resolution: connect CLK7 to MGT227 REFCLK0 with an assembly option to GTP4-7_CLK_IN/OUT.
Yes, but after 18. I've uploaded the wrong file in the zip (PNG instead of diagram source) and I don't have access to that file right now.
Diagram source: AFCZ1v1_Clocking_rev2.zip
- Invalid CLK11 connection
- Swapped FMC2_GBTCLK0_M2C with FMC2_GBTCLK1_M2C (connected to wrong MGT clocks)
- Don't think we really need control buffer to AMC_TCLK and uFL connector. They can be always-on.
There are also couple of missing assembly options, but these are still to be defined.
Why do you use Undefined
values of resistors in some places?
Swapped FMC2_GBTCLK0_M2C with FMC2_GBTCLK1_M2C (connected to wrong MGT clocks)
Can we leave it as is? It's already routed on pcb? If not I'll swap it.
Undefined parts are some leavings from V1.0 - will be changed to 0R with variants
Yeah, we can keep it swapped.
One remark for routing - clock matrix ports can be assigned in a way that would be easier to route.