[ibis-macro] Re: Question about Model Specific parameters
- From: Mike LaBonte <milabont@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Arpad Muranyi <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>, IBIS-ATM <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 08:47:28 -0500
Although the tool may not know the meaning of the Model Specific parameters,
it knows the name and type of each and it has the opportunity to simply
present them to the user in a display or report. The model may wish to have
some non-essential outputs presented to the user. For example, it could
report confidence metrics on how accurate the model is believed to be with
the given tap settings. That would justify usage Out.
Usage InOut might be justified if the model requires a set of inputs that
have some complex relationship defining the allowable ranges, which AMI is
unable to support. For example one parameter might allow a value up to 15 in
most cases, but only up to 12 if some other parameter has crossed some
threshold. In that case the tool is unable to understand and enforce the
rules exactly. The model will have to check and I'm sure it would like to
report back any adjustments it had to make.
An alternative would be to adopt the rule that Model Specific can not be
InOut, and model makers could add "Actual_..." Out Model Specific parameters
to report back to users. But to have a control that has built-in feedback
the InOut type would be best. Think of the f-stop control on a camera lens,
which can only go down so far based on what the zoom level is.
Walter's Dependency Table BIRD 124 is related, but I'm not sure it covers
all possible internal dependencies. It seems to be mostly about
automatically setting some parameters based on how others are set. Limits
are a different matter, and of course models could want to report any kind
of metric that is non-essential to simulation.
Mike
On 2/16/11 7:02 PM, "Arpad Muranyi" <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I stumbled on a situation with an .ami file which has
> a few Model Specific parameters of Usage InOut. Our
> customer is wondering why we don't do this and that
> with the data that is returned by the model in those
> parameters. This triggers the following thoughts in
> my mind.
>
> Model Specific parameters are specific to the model and
> their meaning is not described by the AMI specification.
> Therefore no EDA vendor has the knowledge on how to
> interpret or post process these returned parameters
> because there is simply no way of knowing what to do
> with them.
>
> For this reason, I would suggest that we make a rule in
> the IBIS AMI specification that Model Specific parameter
> must be Usage In, and Usage Out or InOut should not be
> allowed.
>
> Any Comments?
>
> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
