[ibis-macro] Re: IBIS Summit

  • From: "Bob Ross" <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'IBIS-ATM'" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 11:32:40 -0800

Walter:

 

Thanks for the summaries:

 

1. Please re-issue the attachment, but remove the "SiSoft Confidential"

footer.  We cannot upload, use our reflectors, or present at any

meeting confidential material.

 

2. Regarding the Parser plans, I want to clarify:

 

A Tale of Two Parsers, Bob Ross (Teraspeed)

The IBIS 5.1 .ami parser will only check IBIS 5.1 rules (with some special
code for AMI_Version, and Use_Init_Output).

The IBIS 5.1 .ibs parser will only check IBIS 5.1 rules. To me, this means
that if a .ibs file is Version 3.2, it will not generate any warnings or
errors for IBIS 5.1 keywords.

 

                

Your interpretation regarding rules for *.ibs files is not correct.  An
[IBIS Ver] 3.2

file will generate Error, Warning or other messages if it contains

any new keyword, subparameter, argument, or new feature that were

documented in a higher MAJOR version release of the IBIS Specification.

If any new feature exists, the solution is simply to upgrade [IBIS Ver] 3.2

to the minimum new level appropriate for the features.  For example,

for [Algorithmic Model] support, the [IBIS Ver] must be 5.0 or 5.1.

 

We do plan to check IBIS-AMI *.ami files with only AMI-Version "5.1" rules,

but allow the AMI_Version as a non-required parameter to support

files that are already shipped.   These might be considered as implied

"5.0" files before we added the new reserved parameter.  When

AMI_Version is missing, the Use_Init_Output parameter is allowed.

 

However, I expect some appropriate message to be issued since the

original flow with Use_Init_Output is no longer supported.

 

Bob

 

 

 

From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Walter Katz
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 9:11 AM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] IBIS Summit

 

All,

 

Here are my take-aways as it affects the IBIS-ATM committee.

 

A Tale of Two Parsers, Bob Ross (Teraspeed)

The IBIS 5.1 .ami parser will only check IBIS 5.1 rules (with some special
code for AMI_Version, and Use_Init_Output).

The IBIS 5.1 .ibs parser will only check IBIS 5.1 rules. To me, this means
that if a .ibs file is Version 3.2, it will not generate any warnings or
errors for IBIS 5.1 keywords.

 

A System Developer's Perspective on AMI, Greg Edlund (IBM) 

This presentation, and the DesignCon Tutorial (8-MP2 AMI Models: How to tell
a Peach form a Lemon) will be an excellent resource for the IBIS Quality
Committee.

 

Using Function Programming Languages to IBIS AMI Modeling, David Banas
(Altera)

If you close your eyes, you do not have to imagine any changes to the IBIS
Specification to reflect AMI DLLs written in Haskell.

 

Case Study: IBM 15 Gb IBIS-AMI Model using Dependency Tables, Adge Hawes
(IBM), Walter Katz (SiSoft)

An excellent example of the significance of BIRD 150 (Dependency BIRD) to
AMI Model developers.

 

Efficient End-to-end Simulations of 25G Optical Links, Sanjeev Gupta
(Avago), Fangyi Rao (Agilent)

The AMI optical link model used Repeaters as described in BIRD 131, with
some possible extensions. SiSoft requested that Fangyi describe any
enhancement that are required to BIRD 131 in order for SiSoft to run these
models.

 

How did we get here, and how should we go on?, Arpad Muranyi (Mentor)

An excellent presentation that accurately describes the status of BIRDs 122,
116, 117, 118, 129, 144 and 145. Based on discussions I had earlier in the
week with Fangyi, Vladimir, Ambrish and Kumar, I re-affirmed that SiSoft is
is full support of BIRD 117 and 118, with details in my following
presentation.

 

Ad Hoc Discussion: BIRD116 and "Intrinsic Models", Walter Katz (SiSoft)

I verbally gave the enclosed presentation, which describes the four BIRD 122
Analog models converted to BIRDs 116 and aa8 [External Models]. In summary,
when IBIS 5.2 (BIRDs 116 and 118) is approved, SiSoft will produce AMI
models using this [External Model] format. I believe the only controversial
issue regarding these four BIRD 122 Analog models is the requirement of a
termination resistor for the AMI_Touchstone_Rx. I have added termination
resistors with a value RTref (default 50), which satisfy the needs for
Channel Analog simulators that use S-Parameter arithmetic or a SPICE step
response simulation to generate the Channel Impulse Response. When BIRDs 116
and 118 are approved by the Open Forum, SiSoft will publish to IBIS these
four [External Model]s.

 

Walter

 

 

 

 

Walter Katz

wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx

Phone 303.449-2308

Mobile 720.333-1107

 

Other related posts: