[ibis-macro] Re: FW: Question on clock_times
- From: "Dmitriev-Zdorov, Vladimir" <vladimir_dmitriev-zdorov@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Jin, Wenyi" <Wenyi.Jin@xxxxxxx>, <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:33:13 -0600
Agree,
These clock pattern (case 3) is what comes from existing Rx DLL with the
only difference that it takes several - not one - calls before the first
value becomes other than '-1'.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jin, Wenyi [mailto:Wenyi.Jin@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 3:23 PM
To: Dmitriev-Zdorov, Vladimir; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ibis-macro] Re: FW: Question on clock_times
(1) for CASE 2 and CASE 3, how can clock_time begin from 0? It is
already 2nd block.
(2) If some call generate valid clock_time, some not, that means DLL
has to track
the information like block number to decide from which block begin
return clock time.
(3) DLL can always return clock time even CDR is in lock-in stage, it
is the EDA tool that
Specified after how many UI or block, to make use of clock_time.
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dmitriev-Zdorov,
Vladimir
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 2:08 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: FW: Question on clock_times
Please clarify if the following clock time patterns are legitimate when
performing several GetWave calls (for simplicity/brevity, let's assume
that we have only 10 bits per call and will use integers instead of
small double values). Which of the following 3 cases are allowed?
CASE 1:
After the 1-st call:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 -1
After the 2-nd call:
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 -1
After the 3-rd call:
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 -1
etc.
CASE 2:
After the 1-st call:
-1 # # # # # # # # # # // First call does not generate
clocks
After the 2-nd call:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 -1
After the 3-rd call:
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 -1 // time increment continued from
the last call
etc.
CASE 3:
After the 1-st call:
-1 # # # # # # # # # #
After the 2-nd call:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 -1
After the 3-rd call:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 -1 // i.e. always start from zero
etc.
-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 2:38 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] FW: Question on clock_times
Kumar,
So are you saying that the vector can begin
with a bunch of -1 and then have valid number
later in the vector? Lie this:
-1 -1 -1 -1 # # # # # # # # -1 -1 -1 -1
If this is true, is it also true that you can
have alternating -1 and good values in the
vector? Like this?
-1 -1 -1 -1 # # # # # # # # -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 # # # # # # # # -1
-1 -1 -1
Arpad
==============================================
________________________________
From: C. Kumar [mailto:kumarchi@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 3:29 PM
To: Muranyi, Arpad
Subject: Re: [ibis-macro] Question on clock_times
arpad:
let me take shot at this
1. Yes -1 indicates end of clock vector
2. clock vector is the clocks associated with the particular wave vector
in the particular getwave call.
3. some models can have delayed start for returning a clock vector.
Once a legitimate clock vector is returned , the eda tool is expected
to use that information to sample the wave
returned by the getwave call. Other wise the eda tool may rely on its
own devices to sample the wave, (usually this is an 'ideal' clock)
4. some models may modify the wave form but may never return a clock
vector. (i.e -1 in the first position)
________________________________
From: "Muranyi, Arpad" <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Fri, March 26, 2010 4:08:16 PM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Question on clock_times
Hello AMI experts,
I would like to ask a question about the clock_times vector.
The spec says that "The last clock in indicated by putting a
value of -1 at the and of clocks for the current wave sample".
We got a DLL from a vendor which seems to fill the vector
for the first few GetWave calls with -1 and then it starts
filling it with good numbers.
What is the interpretation of the specification? First,
does the above text refer to the entire vector, or each
little section independently that a single GetWave call
returns?
If it is for the entire vector, then having -1 in the first
few thousand locations would mean that everything else
after that is garbage, correct?
If it is per GetWave call, is the EDA tool expected to
assemble something from bits and pieces that are returned
by the various GetWave calls?
Thanks,
Arpad
===============================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Macro website : http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/
IBIS Macro reflector: //www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
Other related posts:
