|Publication number||US20070245287 A1|
|Application number||US 10/883,502|
|Publication date||Oct 18, 2007|
|Filing date||Jun 30, 2004|
|Priority date||Jun 30, 2004|
|Also published as||US7284222, US7849434, US8281273, US8645890, US20080059937, US20110163781, US20130135009|
|Publication number||10883502, 883502, US 2007/0245287 A1, US 2007/245287 A1, US 20070245287 A1, US 20070245287A1, US 2007245287 A1, US 2007245287A1, US-A1-20070245287, US-A1-2007245287, US2007/0245287A1, US2007/245287A1, US20070245287 A1, US20070245287A1, US2007245287 A1, US2007245287A1|
|Inventors||Andre Rohe, Steven Teig|
|Original Assignee||Andre Rohe, Steven Teig|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Referenced by (3), Classifications (8), Legal Events (6)|
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
The present invention is directed towards method and apparatus for identifying connections between configurable nodes in a configurable integrated circuit.
The use of configurable integrated circuits (“IC's”) has dramatically increased in recent years. One example of a configurable IC is a field programmable gate array (“FPGA”). An FPGA is a field programmable IC that has an internal array of logic circuits (also called logic blocks) that are connected together through numerous interconnect circuits (also called interconnects). In an FPGA, the internal array of logic and interconnect circuits is typically surrounded by input/output blocks. Like some other configurable IC's, the logic and interconnect circuits of an FPGA are configurable.
As shown in
Although not explicitly illustrated in
The advantage of the connection architecture illustrated in
Also, the connection architecture illustrated in
There is a need in the art for a configurable IC that has a wiring architecture that increases the interconnectivity between the configurable nodes. Ideally, this wiring architecture is optimized for the interconnectivity between the configurable nodes of the configurable IC. There is also a need for a method that identifies optimal connection schemes for connecting the configurable nodes of a configurable IC.
Some embodiments provide a method that defines a set of connections that connect the nodes in a configurable node array. The method identifies different sets of connections for connecting a set of the nodes. For each identified set of connections, the method computes a metric score that quantifies a quality of the identified set of connections. The method then selects one of the identified sets of connections to connect the configurable nodes in the array.
The novel features of the invention are set forth in the appended claims. However, for purpose of explanation, several embodiments of the invention are set forth in the following figures.
In the following description, numerous details are set forth for purpose of explanation. However, one of ordinary skill in the art will realize that the invention may be practiced without the use of these specific details. For instance, not all embodiments of the invention need to be practiced with the specific number of bits and/or specific devices (e.g., multiplexers) referred to below. In other instances, well-known structures and devices are shown in block diagram form in order not to obscure the description of the invention with unnecessary detail.
A logic circuit is a circuit that can perform a function on a set of input data that it receives. A configurable logic circuit is a logic circuit that can be configured to perform different functions on its input data set.
A configurable interconnect circuit is a circuit that can configurably connect an input set to an output set in a variety of manners.
A configurable node array is an array with numerous configurable nodes that are arranged in several rows and columns.
In some embodiments, some or all configurable nodes in the array have the same or similar circuit structure. For instance, in some embodiments, some or all the nodes have the exact same circuit elements (e.g., have the same set of logic gates and blocks and/or same interconnect circuits), where one or more of these identical elements are configurable elements. One such example would be a set of nodes in the array that are each formed by a particular set of LUT's and interconnects. Having nodes with the same circuit elements simplifies the process for designing and fabricating the IC, as it allows the same circuit designs and mask patterns to be repetitively used to design and fabricate the IC.
In some embodiments, the similar configurable nodes not only have the same circuit elements but also have the same exact internal wiring between their circuit elements. For instance, in some embodiments, a particular set of LUT's and interconnects that are wired in a particular manner forms each node in a set of nodes in the array. Having such nodes further simplifies the design and fabrication processes as it further simplifies the design and mask making processes.
In some embodiments, each configurable node in a configurable node array is a simple or complex configurable logic circuit. In some embodiments, each configurable node in a configurable node array is a configurable interconnect circuit. In such an array, a configurable node (i.e., a configurable interconnect circuit) can connect to one or more logic circuits. In turn, such logic circuits in some embodiments might be arranged in terms of another configurable logic-circuit array that is interspersed among the configurable interconnect-circuit array.
Several figures below illustrate several “direct connections” between nodes in an array. A direct connection is an electrical connection between two nodes that is achieved by (1) a set of wire segments that traverse through a set of the wiring layers of the IC, and (2) a set of vias when two or more wiring layers are involved.
In some embodiments, a direct connection might also include a set of buffer circuits in some cases. In other words, two nodes are directly connected in some embodiments by a set of wire segments that possibly traverse through a set of buffer circuits and a set of vias. Buffer circuits are not logic or interconnect circuits. In some embodiments, buffer circuits are part of some or all direct connections. Buffer circuits might be used to achieve one or more objectives (e.g., maintain the signal strength, reduce noise, delay signal, etc.) along the wire segments that establish the direct connections. Inverting buffer circuits also allow an IC design to reconfigure logic circuits less frequently and/or use fewer types of logic circuits. In some embodiments, buffer circuits are formed by one or more inverters (e.g., two or more inverters that are connected in series).
Several figures below “topologically” illustrate several direct connections between nodes in an array. A topological illustration is an illustration that is only meant to show a direct connection between two nodes without specifying a particular geometric layout for the wire segments that establish the direct connection.
II. Direct Connections Between Offset Nodes
As mentioned above, the illustrations of the direct connections in
In other instances, the set of wire segments that establish a direct connection between two nodes are on several wiring layers. For example, in some cases, the direct connection between nodes 1305 a and 1305 b has a geometric realization that is similar to the representation illustrated in
When the IC uses a wiring model that allows occasional or systematic diagonal wiring, a direct connection between two nodes can be established by one or more diagonal wire segments possibly in conjunction with one or more Manhattan (i.e., horizontal or vertical) segments. For the direct connection between nodes 1305 a and 1305 c,
Some embodiments allow “long-offset” direct connections between two nodes in the array. A “long-offset” connection is a direct connection between two nodes in the array that are offset by more than one row and at least one column, or more than one column and at least once row. As mentioned above, a direct connection might include one or more buffer circuits that are connected to the wire segments of the direct connection. In some embodiments, such buffer circuits are more likely to be used for longer connections than for the shorter connections, as signal strength is a more pressing issue for longer connections.
Table 1 below identifies the direct connections of node 1505. This table identifies a direct connection between node 1505 and one of its neighboring nodes in terms of two coordinates. These two coordinates are a delta-column coordinate and a delta-row coordinate, which specify the column and row offset between the particular node and the connected neighboring node.
TABLE 1 Direct Connections of Node 1505 Delta-Column Delta-Row 2 0 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 −1 1 −1 3 −1 0 −2 0 −1 −1 2 −2
III. Different Direct-Connection Schemes
Some embodiments of the invention use several different direct connection schemes for same types of nodes in a configurable node array.
The nodes 1605 and 1610 are of the same type. In some embodiments, two nodes are of the same type when they have the same circuit elements with one or more of these identical elements being configurable. In some embodiments, two nodes of the same type also have the same internal wiring between their identical circuit elements. For instance, in some embodiments, the nodes 1605 and 1610 are two switchboxes that have the same component circuit elements and interconnect wiring between the circuit elements.
Tables 2 and 3 below respectively identify the direct connections of nodes 1605 and 1610. Like Table 1, each of these tables identifies a direct connection between a particular node and one of its neighboring nodes in terms of two coordinates, a delta-column coordinate and a delta-row coordinate. For instance, the third record in Table 2 specifies a delta-column coordinate of −1 and a delta-row coordinate of 0. This record specifies a direct connection between node 1605 and the node 1615 directly to the left of it. Alternatively, the fifth record in Table 3 specifies a delta-column coordinate of 2 and a delta-row coordinate of 2. This record specifies a direct connection between node 1610 and the node 1620, which is two rows above and two columns to the right of node 1610.
TABLE 2 Direct Connections of Node 1605 Delta-Column Delta-Row 1 0 0 1 −1 0 0 −1 2 0 3 3 −3 2 −1 1 −1 −2 1 −3 1 −1 TABLE 3
Direct Connections of Node 1610
Some embodiments of the invention use several different direct connection schemes for similar node types in a configurable node array. One such embodiment is illustrated in
TABLE 4 Direct Connection Schemes 1800-2100 Connection 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th Scheme Vector Vector Vector Vector Vector Vector Vector Vector 1 (1800) 1, 0 0, 1 −1, 0 0, −1 1, 1 −3, 0 2, 1 8, 8 2 (1900) 0, 1 −1, 0 0, −1 1, 0 −1, 1 0, −3 −1, 2 −8, 8 3 (2000) −1, 0 0, −1 1, 0 0, 1 1, −1 −3, 0 2, −1 8, −8 4 (2100) 0, −1 1, 0 0, 1 −1, 0 −1, −1 0, 3 −1, −2 −8, −8
As indicated in Table 4, each of the four connection schemes illustrated in
As apparent from the numerical values of the vectors specified in Table 4, the connection schemes illustrated in
Other embodiments use other symmetrical relationships to generate other sets of symmetrical connection schemes.
One of ordinary skill will realize that other embodiment might use fewer or more connection schemes for nodes of the same type in a configurable node array. For instance, some embodiments might only use two connection schemes. Also, in other embodiments, some or all of the connection schemes are not symmetrically related to the other connections schemes. In addition, some embodiments do not include unit vectors or the same set of unit vectors in each connection scheme. Furthermore, in some embodiments, the different connection schemes define different number of long-offset direct connections for the same type of configurable nodes.
IV. Process for Specifying Different Direct-Connection Schemes
Some embodiments of the invention provide a method that defines a set of connections for connecting nodes in a configurable node array, which, in some embodiments, are the same type of nodes. This method examines several different sets of connections for connecting a set of the nodes. In each of the identified sets, the method then computes a metric score that quantifies a quality of the identified set of connections in connecting the configurable nodes. The method then selects at least one of the identified sets of connections for connecting the configurable nodes in the array.
Different embodiments might use different metric scores that optimize different qualities of the connection sets. For instance, in some embodiments, the metric score might express the number of nodes reachable from a node. This metric score optimizes the overall reachability. In other embodiments, the metric score might express length constraints, reconvergence, reachability within a particular number of “hops,” prioritized reachability, etc. (where a hop is a direct connection between two nodes).
Different embodiments use different optimization techniques to optimize the metric score that quantifies the quality of the identified set of connections. For instance, some embodiments use complex constrained optimization techniques, such as local optimization, simulated annealing, etc. Other embodiments use less complex techniques. One example of a simple constrained optimization technique is illustrated in
As shown in this figure, the process 2400 initially generates (at 2405) a candidate connection-vector set for a single direct-connection scheme. In some embodiments, the candidate-vector set generated at 2405 includes only the direct-connection vectors that will differ among the direct-connection schemes specified by the process 2400. For instance, the process does not generate any unit vectors at 2405 when each direct-connection scheme is to have the same set of unit vectors. In some embodiments, the process generates (at 2405) the candidate connection-vector set randomly based on a set of constraints, such as the number of vectors in the set, the maximum length for any given vector, etc.
After 2405, the process determines (at 2410) whether the candidate set generated at 2405 is an acceptable candidate set. In some embodiments, the process makes this determination by checking whether the specified set meets a set of constraints. These constraints can relate to some desired numerical attribute or attributes of the candidate vector set (such as the average length of vectors in the set, the maximum edge length, the total edge length) or some other constraint related to the candidate vector set (e.g., congestion based metrics based on the expected congestion caused by a candidate vector set). Some embodiments use only one constraint (e.g., the average vector length) while other embodiments use multiple constraints. Also, some embodiments compute vector lengths by assuming a Euclidean (“all-angle”) wiring, while other embodiments compute lengths based on other wiring models, such as a Manhattan model, an octilinear model, a hexalinear model, etc.
When the process determines (at 2410) that the candidate vectors set is acceptable, the process evaluates (at 2420) the candidate vector set. One example of such an evaluation will be described below by reference to
After evaluating the candidate vector set, the process determines (at 2425) whether the candidate vector set resulted in the best solution that it has generated thus far. In some embodiments, the process makes the determination at 2425 based on the metric score computed by the evaluation process at 2420. If the process determines (at 2425) that the candidate vector set did not result in the best solution, the process transitions to 2415, which will be further described below. On the other hand, when the candidate vector set results in the best solution, the process records (at 2430) the candidate vector set as the best solution. In some embodiments, the process records (at 2430) not only the candidate vector set specified at 2405 but also its symmetrically related vector sets that the evaluation process 2500 of
At 2415, the process determines whether it has examined sufficient number of candidate vector sets. When the process determines (at 2415) that it has examined a sufficient number of candidate vector sets, the process returns to 2405 to start its operation again. Otherwise, the process ends. In some embodiments, the process 2400 loops automatically without the stopping criteria at 2415, until the process is stopped by an operator or another process.
Next, in some embodiments, the process adds (at 2510) to each vector set the set of vectors that are common among the vectors sets. For instance, in some embodiments, each vector set will include the four unit vectors in the horizontal and vertical directions (i.e, will include (1,0), (0,1), (−1,0), and (0 ,−1)). Accordingly, in these embodiments, the process adds (at 2510) these four unit vectors to each vector set.
After 2510, the process selects (at 2515) a node in the array as its origin. In some embodiments, this node is the node that is closest to the center of the array. Based on the candidate vector sets generated at 2505 and completed at 2510, the process then calculates (at 2520) all nodes that can be reached from the designated node origin in different number of hops (e.g., 1, 2, 3, etc.). Some embodiments use a breadth-first search to perform this calculation.
Based on the calculated numbers, the process then computes a metric score at 2525. Some embodiments use the following equation to compute a metric score.
where R is the calculated number of nodes that are reachable within one to i hops, n is the number of rows or number of columns, in a node array that may or may not be a square array, and X is an integer (e.g., 5, 10, 100, 1000, etc.). This score approximates the expected length from the origin (i.e., the node selected at 2515) to a random node in the array.
Other embodiments use either of the following equations in place of, or in conjunction with, the equation (1) above.
where R and i are as defined above for equation (1). To use the scores of several of the above equations in conjunction with each other, some embodiments compute a blended sum of these scores.
After 2525, the process 2500 ends.
Table 5 provides metric scores that are generated by equation (1) for different connection schemes that are produced by using the processes 2400 and 2500 of
TABLE 5 Total Length of Score in a Score in a Score in a Number of Offset or Offset or Non-Unit 100 × 100 70 × 70 40 × 40 Nodes reachable Non-Unit Vectors Vectors node array node array node array in 3 hops 4 80 7.95 6.64 4.89 115.5 4 128 6.81 5.65 4.26 340 4 176 6.06 5.17 3.92 477.5
Table 6 provides a comparable set of numbers for a configurable node array that is interconnected through the prior art connection scheme illustrated in
TABLE 6 Total Length of Offset/ Score in a Score in a Score in a Nodes Non-Unit 100 × 100 70 × 70 40 × 40 reachable Vectors Vectors node array node array node array in 3 hops (0, 1) (1, 0) (0, −1) (−1, 0) 80 17.3 12.3 7.35 145 (0, 2) (2, 0) (0, −2) (−2, 0) (0, 3) (3, 0) (0, −3) (−3, 0) (0, 1) (1, 0) (0, −1) (−1, 0) 128 10.1 7.7 5.12 241 (0, 2) (2, 0) (0, −2) (−2, 0) (0, 6) (6, 0) (0, −6) (−6, 0) (0, 1) (1, 0) (0, −1) (−1, 0) 176 9.82 7.33 4.8 321 (0, 2) (2, 0) (0, −2) (−2, 0) (0, 3) (3, 0) (0, −3) (−3, 0) (0, 6) (6, 0) (0, −6) (−6, 0)
The second, third, and fourth rows in Table 6 are comparable to the second, third, and fourth rows in Table 5 as the total length of vectors of the connection schemes of these rows are equal. As it can be seen by comparing the score and hop data of the comparable rows in Tables 5 and 6, the connection schemes that result from the constraints specified in Table 5 result in distinctly better scores and hop values. Such better scores and hop values are because the processes 2400 and 2500 examine numerous connection schemes and select the one that results in the best metric score.
Although the processes 2400 and 2500 was described above, one of ordinary skill will realize that other embodiments can use a variety of other processes to specify different direct-connection schemes for different configurable nodes in a configurable node array. As mentioned above, these processes might use a variety of other optimization techniques, such as local optimization, simulated annealing, etc. Also, some embodiments use several different connection schemes for a configurable node array, with at least two of the connection schemes specifying a different number of long-offset direction connections (e.g., one connection scheme might specify four long-offset direct connections, while another connection scheme might specify six long-offset direct connections).
Instead of generating a first connection scheme and generating the other connection schemes based on the first scheme, some embodiments might partially generate two or more of the connection schemes and then generate the remaining connections based on symmetrical relationships with the partially generated connections of the two or more connection schemes. For instance, some embodiments might generate one vector for each connection scheme, and then rotate each of these vectors through the various symmetrical angles in order to generate the additional vectors of the connection schemes. Alternatively, some embodiments might completely generate two or more of the connection schemes independently from each other.
As mentioned above, the process 2500 selects (at 2515) one node in the array and computes (at 2520) the number of nodes reachable from the selected node in a set number of hops. This process then uses the computed number of nodes in calculating its metric score at 2525. Other embodiments, however, select (at 2515) several different nodes in the array, calculate (at 2520) the number of nodes reachable from these selected nodes, and then compute (at 2525) the metric score based on the number calculated at 2520. For instance, some embodiments calculate (at 2520) the number of reachable nodes for each node in the array. Some of these embodiments then (at 2520) generate an average of these numbers, and use (at 2525) this generated average to generate their metric scores at 2525.
V. Configurable Node Array with Built-In Turns
Some embodiments of the invention are IC's with configurable node arrays that have a systematic series of build-in turns. Such turns can be arranged in a variety of different architectural schemes, such as symmetrical schemes, asymmetrical schemes, nested schemes, any combination of symmetrical, asymmetrical, and/or nested schemes, etc.
In some embodiments, the array 2600 has numerous direct connections (not shown) between pairs of neighboring nodes that are horizontally or vertically aligned (i.e., that are in the same row or column in the array).
In addition to the direct connections between horizontally and vertically aligned nodes, the array 2600 includes numerous direct connections 2610 between nodes that are offset in the array. Specifically, as shown in
Such connections 2610 are referred to as “built-in turns.” Built-in turns allow two offset nodes to be connected by relying on wiring architecture that reduces the number of interconnect circuits necessary for establishing the connection between the two nodes. For instance, as shown in
In some cases, built-in turns do not eliminate the need to rely on intervening interconnect circuits, but instead reduce the number of intervening interconnect circuits. For instance, in
Alternatively, as shown in
Also, the alternative connection scheme that uses the turn connection 2770 reduces reliance on intervening interconnect circuits by eliminating node 2720's interconnect circuit from the connection path. Reducing the number of intervening interconnect circuits is often desirable. The use of interconnect circuits adversely affects the IC's operational speed, because it requires signals (1) to traverse from the higher wiring layers to the IC's substrate for processing by the relatively slow transistor-level logic and then (2) to traverse back to the higher wiring layers from the IC's substrate. Interconnect circuits also take valuable real estate on an IC. Therefore, it is often desirable to minimize the use of interconnect circuits so that they can be used only in situations were they are required.
Each built-in turn 2610 in
Yet other alternative arrangements can be used in other embodiments, where the wire segments of different built-in turns 2610 of the array 2600 are arranged differently. For instance, in some embodiments, different turns 2610 might have their wiring segments on different wiring layers (e.g., some might have their horizontal segments on layer 4, while others might have their horizontal segments on layer 5). Also, in some embodiments, some turns 2610 might have all their segments on the same wiring layer, while other turns 2610 might have their wiring segments on different wiring layers.
As illustrated in
Some embodiments define multiple sets of built-in turns that have multiple sets of symmetrical relationships with each other. For instance, in addition to the four sets of symmetrically arranged turns 2610 of
Like each turn 2610, each turn 3010 can be established by (1) a set of wire segments that traverse through a set of the IC's wiring layers, (2) a set of vias when two or more wiring layers are involved, and (3) possibly one or more buffer circuits. Like the turns 2610, the turns 3010 can also be categorized into four sub-sets of turns that are laid out horizontally and/or vertically symmetrically in the array an origin 3015 in the array. In addition, the turns 3010 are symmetrically related to the turns 2610 as they are rotated versions of the turns 2610.
As mentioned above, the configurable nodes 2605 are all the same type of nodes in some embodiments. For instance, in some embodiments, all the nodes have the same circuit structure (i.e., the same circuit elements) and perhaps the same internal wiring. One example of such nodes would be switch boxes in a traditional island style architecture.
Although several sets of built-in turns were described above by reference to
Like the turns illustrated in
VI. Configurable IC and System
The data also includes in some embodiments configuration data that configure the nodes to perform particular operations.
A configurable IC of the invention can also include circuits other than the configurable node array and I/O circuitry. For instance,
This processor 3615 can read and write instructions and/or data from an on-chip memory 3620 or an offchip memory 3625. The processor 3615 can also communicate with the configurable block 3650 through memory 3620 and/or 3625 through buses 3610 and/or 3630. Similarly, the configurable block can retrieve data from and supply data to memories 3620 and 3625 through buses 3610 and 3630.
The bus 3710 collectively represents all system, peripheral, and chipset interconnects (including bus and non-bus interconnect structures) that communicatively connect the numerous internal devices of the system 3700. For instance, the bus 3710 communicatively connects the IC 3710 with the read-only memory 3720, the system memory 3715, and the permanent storage device 3725.
From these various memory units, the IC 3705 receives data for processing and configuration data for configuring the IC's configurable logic and/or interconnect circuits. When the IC 3705 has a processor, the IC also retrieves from the various memory units instructions to execute. The read-only-memory (ROM) 3720 stores static data and instructions that are needed by the IC 3710 and other modules of the system 3700. The storage device 3725, on the other hand, is read-and-write memory device. This device is a non-volatile memory unit that stores instruction and/or data even when the system 3700 is off. Like the storage device 3725, the system memory 3715 is a read-and-write memory device. However, unlike storage device 3725, the system memory is a volatile read-and-write memory, such as a random access memory. The system memory stores some of the instructions and/or data that the IC needs at runtime.
The bus 3710 also connects to the input and output devices 3730 and 3735. The input devices enable the user to enter information into the system 3700. The input devices 3730 can include touch-sensitive screens, keys, buttons, keyboards, cursor-controllers, microphone, etc. The output devices 3735 display the output of the system 3700.
Finally, as shown in
While the invention has been described with reference to numerous specific details, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the invention can be embodied in other specific forms without departing from the spirit of the invention. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the invention is not to be limited by the foregoing illustrative details, but rather is to be defined by the appended claims.
|Citing Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US7622951||Jan 25, 2008||Nov 24, 2009||Tabula, Inc.||Via programmable gate array with offset direct connections|
|US7626419||Jul 27, 2007||Dec 1, 2009||Tabula, Inc.||Via programmable gate array with offset bit lines|
|US9099195||Dec 7, 2011||Aug 4, 2015||The Trustees Of Princeton University||Hybrid nanotube/CMOS dynamically reconfigurable architecture and system therefore|
|Cooperative Classification||G06F2217/08, G06F17/5077, H03K19/17708, G06F17/5054|
|European Classification||G06F17/50D4, G06F17/50L2|
|Apr 21, 2005||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: TABULA, INC., A CORP. OF DE, CALIFORNIA
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:ROHE, ANDRE;TEIG, STEVEN;REEL/FRAME:016477/0867
Effective date: 20040722
|Jan 27, 2009||CC||Certificate of correction|
|Apr 15, 2011||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 4
|Apr 1, 2015||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 8
|May 27, 2015||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: TABULA (ASSIGNMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF CREDITORS),
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:TABULA, INC.;REEL/FRAME:035783/0055
Effective date: 20150427
|Jul 2, 2015||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: ALTERA CORPORATION, CALIFORNIA
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:TABULA (ASSIGNMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF CREDITORS), LLC;REEL/FRAME:036050/0792
Effective date: 20150622