I'm not understanding the "would not get used in the document unless we
were to abandon the Buf_I/O, Ground_clamp_ref, etc. terminology" part.
Would those terms be replaced by something else for Terminal_type?
Mike
From: ibis-interconn-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-interconn-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mirmak, Michael
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 9:38 AM
To: IBIS-Interconnect (ibis-interconn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Subject: [ibis-interconn] Die pads vs. die supply pads
Per yesterday's meeting discussion, a quick check of the interconnect
proposal text shows that the document is fairly consistent in using the
phrase "die pads" (usually capitalized) to refer to the physical
connection point between the on-die interconnect and the package. This
point would sit between the buffer and the pin.
However, our use of the phrase "die supply pads", particularly in the
keyword [Die Supply Pads], conflicts with this, and helps expose some
fairly confusing terminology elsewhere.
We are using the term "die pad" to distinguish it from the "pad" on a PCB
where a connection might be soldered. Further, if the three connection
points are pins, die pads and buffers, and these are being classified as
I/O or supply, then we have two ways of organizing the names to make them
consistent:
Option A:
- Supply Die Pads (including the keyword, which would be renamed)
- I/O Die Pads
- Supply Pins
- I/O Pins
For buffers, the terms "Supply Buffer" and "I/O Buffer" are nonsensical
even if they are consistent. However, we are really referring to Buffer
"nodes" or connection points, so "Supply Buffer Nodes" and I/O Buffer
Nodes" would seem both consistent and reasonably clear. However, these
would not get used in the document unless we were to abandon the Buf_I/O,
Ground_clamp_ref, etc. terminology.
Option B:
- Die Supply Pads (as used for the keyword now)
- Die I/O Pads
- Component Supply Pins
- Component I/O Pins
- Buffer Supply Nodes
- Buffer I/O Nodes
Again, the latter two would not get used in the document unless we were to
abandon the Buf_I/O, Ground_clamp_ref, etc. terminology.
Is either of these options reasonable? Is there any other option?
- MM
