Re: XGMII Clocks
I would suggest defining a differential clock for XGMII, such that
the PMD side supports differential clock but is optional on the ASIC.
System implementer would have a choice of running either single ended or
differential clock back to their ASIC.
Meeting setup and hold across 40 lines is already challenging, optional
differential clock improves system margin by reducing DCD and noise. I
would strongly suggest using differential clock specially on the ASIC.
> Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:30:12 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Howard Frazier <hfrazier@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: XGMII Clocks
> X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients <stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> X-Listname: stds-802-3-hssg
> X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> X-Moderator-Address: stds-802-3-hssg-approval@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In a previous email thread, we debated the merits of using
> a single clock in each direction on the XGMII, versus using
> 4 (frequency locked, but phase independent) clocks in each direction,
> with a clock dedicated to each of the four "lanes".
> Without repeating the discussion, it is safe to summarize that
> the majority opinion (from among those who expressed an opinion)
> was to stay with one clock in each direction.
> So, I would like to toss out another question for your consideration.
> Should we use a two phase clock? Clock and ClockBar?
> Some designers have suggested that this will make the ASIC and
> system timing more managable, because it is difficult to get
> symetric drive strengths from the clock output buffers, and
> the asymetry degrades the timing. With a two phase clock, you
> would still have asymetry on the data signals, but at least
> you won't have to account for the asymetry on the clock.
> At first blush, this seems like a modest addition. One more pin
> in each direction.
> Any opinions out there?
> Howard Frazier
> Cisco Systems, Inc.