[ibis-editorial] Re: PAM_Thresholds interpretation
- From: "Muranyi, Arpad" <arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 02:00:27 +0000
Thank you for the update.
Hopefully that’s it.
Crossing my fingers… 😊
Arpad
=======================
From: Mirmak, Michael <michael.mirmak@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 7:50 PM
To: Muranyi, Arpad (DI SW EBS PST AV) <arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: PAM_Thresholds interpretation
I elected to use Arpad’s version, but can switch as the group decides.
Enclosed please find the updated draft 6.
Note that, in addition to the modified PAM_Thresholds text, we need to add
three more items to the Change list:
* Table 28 updated for PAM_Thresholds requirements
* Figure 44 caption added and related broken cross-references fixed
* Minor grammatical corrections (e.g., inappropriate use of “parentheses”
rather than “parenthesis” in some areas, at least one incorrect dash when an
underscore was needed)
Hopefully that’s it.
* MM
From:
ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 5:41 PM
To: ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis-editorial] Re: PAM_Thresholds interpretation
All,
I just saw Walter’s email from about 4 hours ago (it landed in my junk box for
some reason).
His response and mine are pretty much in agreement using different wording. I
prefer my
wording but I am not stuck on it, as long as the message is that the EDA tool
takes what the
model returns (and not what is in the .ami file’s placeholder)…
Thanks,
Arpad
============================================================================
From: Mirmak, Michael
<michael.mirmak@xxxxxxxxx<
mailto:michael.mirmak@xxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 7:17 PM
To: Muranyi, Arpad (DI SW EBS PST AV)
<arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxxxx>>;
ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: PAM_Thresholds interpretation
Arpad,
This certainly makes sense.
I have made all the other corrections needed and am ready to distribute the
updated file once we decide this issue.
* MM
From:
ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 3:11 PM
To: ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis-editorial] Re: PAM_Thresholds interpretation
Weston, and Everyone,
Reading that sentence in context tells me that instead of:
“The EDA tool uses the voltages passed in through this parameter”
we should have written:
“The EDA tool uses the voltages returned by the executable model through this
parameter”
The reason I think this is because the first sentence in “Definition” says:
“Voltages used by EDA tools for PAMn waveform and eye processing.”
and combining that with the parameter being Usage Out, the only way
the EDA tool can receive this value is if it is returned by the executable
model.
If we agree on this, I would suggest that Michael should change this
sentence as I propose above.
Thanks,
Arpad
==============================================================
From:
ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
On Behalf Of Beal, Weston
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 3:18 PM
To: ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis-editorial] PAM_Thresholds interpretation
All,
After Walter asked about the interpretation of the PAM_Thresholds parameter
this morning, I thought I should look into it to increase my understanding.
While the specification does not explicitly say that the string in the AMI file
must contain anything, the description and the example imply that the string
should have n-1 numbers in it. The description says, “The EDA tool uses the
voltages passed in through this parameter”, which implies to me that the string
value in the AMI file should have n-1 numbers in it. Then in the example code
the string has 3 numbers in it.
(PAM_Thresholds (Usage Out) (Type String)
(Description "Thresholds for waveform and eye processing.")
(Value “0.00 0.00 0.00”)
)
Maybe this needs a BIRD to clarify that the Value in the AMI file is only a
placeholder and the string value is ignored. On the other hand, the description
and the example imply that the model might use these numbers in some way. This
conflicts with the Usage Out syntax. So, either way, it seems to be
inconsistent.
Regards,
Weston
Other related posts:
