From: Larry Miller ([email protected])
Date: Wed Nov 03 1999 - 06:17:13 PST
Our 1 Gb Ethernet SERDES chips have gone over from bipolar to CMOS "PECL".
We had some trouble with early versions latching up.
Have you had to allow for this?
Larry Miller
At 09:37 AM 11/2/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Jayarama Shenoy wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Can someone provide insight into PECL output buffer
>> implementation in CMOS tecnologies? It is being claimed
>> that this cannot be done while at the same time retaining
>> the power supply noise rejection of differential output
>> drivers, which I find hard to understand.
>>
>> Any pointers to public literature on PECL (or similar diff-
>> erential) output drivers in CMOS will be greatly appreciated.
>
>Hey, Jay.
>
>PECL can most certainly be done in CMOS. That, or the ones I'm
>shipping use previously-unknown laws of physics. As for telling
>YOU the details, you now need an NDA. Should've asked before you
>left!
>
>Seriously, what your sources were referring to was that since CMOS
>doesn't make efficient low-offset pullup followers the way bipolar
>does, you don't get the benefits of hanging the positive rail on
>the high-impedance collector (or drain) node of the transistor.
>The high impedance of the collector node means that voltage noise
>on the positive rail doesn't show up as current noice on the output.
>
>The hidden assumption here is that the CMOS output follower has to
>run on the same supply as the predriver. Where bipolar thrives on
>small base-emitter voltages, MOS devices need more voltage bias and
>the voltages available in PECL aren't well-chosen for this. (Duh!)
>
>On the other hand, nowhere is it written in stone that the positive
>rail for PECL has to be +5 volts. 2.5 volts with a 3.3 volt predriver
>gives an output common-mode point of about 1.2 volts, which is by
>astonishing coincidence also (a) centered in the rails, and (b) the
>common-mode point for LVDS. Astonishing. And along with this comes
>a high-state Vgs of 1.5 volts, which is enough to make a reasonable
>NMOS output device happy without desaturating it.
>
>Another possibility is to run open-drain. If you absolutely need the
>speed, this is nice because you don't have to coordinate the pullup
>an pulldown devices.
>
>The reference supply voltage for PECL is a system tradeoff. Personally,
>the more I work with PECL the more unprintable things I find to say
>about it. That acronym lends itself to some amazing abuse, let me
>tell you. If you have *anything* resembling a choice, run (don't walk)
>to a more sensible scheme like HSTL or GLVDS. A lot of the 'PECL'
>applications I'm seeing actually don't require PECL and would work fine
>with almost any low-swing differential scheme.
>
>--
>D. C. Sessions
>[email protected]
>
>**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
[email protected]. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE
si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list ****
>
>
**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to [email protected]. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list ****
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 29 2000 - 11:39:32 PST