Latency Optimized Asynchronous Early Output Ripple Carry Adder based on Delay-Insensitive Dual-Rail Data Encoding

Asynchronous circuits employing delay-insensitive codes for data representation i.e. encoding and following a 4-phase return-to-zero protocol for handshaking are generally robust. Depending upon whether a single delay-insensitive code or multiple delay-insensitive code(s) are used for data encoding, the encoding scheme is called homogeneous or heterogeneous delay-insensitive data encoding. This article proposes a new latency optimized early output asynchronous ripple carry adder (RCA) that utilizes single-bit asynchronous full adders (SAFAs) and dual-bit asynchronous full adders (DAFAs) which incorporate redundant logic and are based on the delay-insensitive dual-rail code i.e. homogeneous data encoding, and follow a 4-phase return-to-zero handshaking. Amongst various RCA, carry lookahead adder (CLA), and carry select adder (CSLA) designs, which are based on homogeneous or heterogeneous delay-insensitive data encodings which correspond to the weak-indication or the early output timing model, the proposed early output asynchronous RCA that incorporates SAFAs and DAFAs with redundant logic is found to result in reduced latency for a dual-operand addition operation. In particular, for a 32-bit asynchronous RCA, utilizing 15 stages of DAFAs and 2 stages of SAFAs leads to reduced latency. The theoretical worst-case latencies of the different asynchronous adders were calculated by taking into account the typical gate delays of a 32/28nm CMOS digital cell library, and a comparison is made with their practical worst-case latencies estimated. The theoretical and practical worst-case latencies show a close correlation....Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1704.0761

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF QUASI-DELAY-INSENSITIVE ASYNCHRONOUS ADDERS CORRESPONDING TO RETURN-TO-ZERO AND RETURN-TO-ONE HANDSHAKING

This article makes a comparative evaluation of quasi-delay-insensitive (QDI) asynchronous adders, realized using the delay-insensitive dual-rail code, which adhere to 4-phase return-to-zero (RTZ) and 4-phase return-to-one (RTO) handshake protocols. The QDI adders realized correspond to the following adder architectures: i) ripple carry adder, ii) carry lookahead adder, and iii) carry select adder. The QDI adders correspond to three different timing regimes viz. strong-indication, weak-indication and early output. They are physically implemented using a 32/28nm CMOS process. The comparative evaluation shows that, overall, QDI adders which correspond to the 4-phase RTO handshake protocol are better than the QDI adder counterparts which correspond to the 4-phase RTZ handshake protocol in terms of latency, area, and average power dissipation