You can use incremental synthesis to reuse existing synthesis results. This approach reduces typical synthesis compile times by 50%. When used with the incremental implementation flow, this approach also improves overall compile time and timing closure consistency.
When a design is synthesized, it is broken into RTL partitions. Incremental synthesis reuses RTL partitions from a previous synthesis run. RTL partitions are typically created along logical hierarchies. Incremental synthesis only runs if the design is large enough that synthesis creates at least 4 RTL partitions, each containing at least 25000 instances. Instances include both logical hierarchy and RTL primitives.
Following are the different modes available when using the
synth_design -incremental_mode <value> command:
- Incremental synthesis is not run.
- Fastest results but no cross boundary optimizations. This mode limits logic performance.
- Most logic optimizations enabled, including cross-boundary optimization. Compile time is significantly reduced from non-incremental synthesis.
- All optimizations are enabled. Compile time is significantly reduced from non-incremental synthesis.
quick mode is typically recommended
for low-performance designs only. Without cross boundary optimizations, typical designs
have reduced performance. However, if a design is well constructed with registered
hierarchical boundaries, performance might not be affected. Due to the limits on
cross-boundary optimization, resynthesis in a given area is caused by RTL changes only
in that area. Changes in another synthesis partition do not trigger changes beyond that
partition. This leads to more reuse and a faster synthesis result. For other modes, this
is not the case, and RTL changes might trigger the resynthesis of more partitions beyond
just the partition the cell is in. When more than 50% of partitions are modified, a full
resynthesis is triggered.
For high-performance designs, the
off modes are recommended. More optimizations are enabled
modes, which might lead to more resynthesis but higher QoR.
To more aggressively address compile time concerns, you can compare the incremental synthesis against OOC synthesis. OOC synthesis is typically used by IP, and setup is automatic. Global synthesis with incremental synthesis offers the advantage of cross-boundary optimizations as well as compile time benefits. Following are areas to consider:
- Compile time
OOC synthesis is faster, because it reduces the amount of code that is elaborated each time. RTL is only elaborated if the RTL is modified within the OOC module.
Incremental synthesis has a performance advantage over OOC synthesis, because optimization is not possible across OOC boundaries.
For non-IP flows, when you create an OOC synthesis run, you must create a wrapper when generics/parameters are passed from higher modules. In addition, you must create a separate timing constraint file to target the OOC-level ports. Incremental synthesis does not have these requirements.
For more information, see the Vivado Design Suite User Guide: Synthesis (UG901).