Arpad, All,
I agree that BIRD161.1 should be deferred and even stripped down. It has
some unrelated elements in it that could delay its resolution..
The immediate problem introduced by BIRD189.4 is that separate Buffer and
Pad interfaces are defined. That makes "Die" ambiguous because it has been
used to describe the buffer location. It can be used for the Pad location
(or "die pad" for on-die interconnects in BIRD189.4). The problem and
possible resolution is below:
Existing V6.1
Keyword: [Component]
Required: Yes
Description: Marks the beginning of the IBIS description of the
integrated circuit named after the keyword.
Sub-Params: Si_location, Timing_location
Usage Rules: If the .ibs file contains data for more than one component,
each section must begin with a new [Component] keyword. The length of the
component name must not exceed 40 characters, and blank characters are
allowed.
NOTE: Blank characters are not recommended due to usability issues.
Si_location and Timing_location are optional and specify where the Signal
Integrity and Timing measurements are made for the component. Allowed
values for either subparameter are "Die" or "Pin". The default location is
at the "Pin".
Example:
[Component] 7403398 MC452
|
Si_location Pin | Optional subparameters to give measurement
Timing_location Die | location positions
A proposed change in red:
Keyword: [Component]
Required: Yes
Description: Marks the beginning of the IBIS description of the
integrated circuit named after the keyword.
Sub-Params: Si_location, Timing_location
Usage Rules: If the .ibs file contains data for more than one component,
each section must begin with a new [Component] keyword. The length of the
component name must not exceed 40 characters, and blank characters are
allowed.
NOTE: Blank characters are not recommended due to usability issues.
Si_location and Timing_location are optional and specify where the Signal
Integrity and Timing measurements are made for the component. Allowed
values for either subparameter are "Buffer", "Die" or "Pin" to support three
possible locations available when connections are made using the
[Interconnect Model Set Selector] keyword below.. (The "Die" maps into Pad
or die pad locations.) The default location is at the "Pin". For pins
whose connections to the buffer do NOT use the [Interconnect Model Set
Selector] keyword, "Buffer" and "Die" describe the same location at the
buffer interface.
Example:
[Component] 7403398 MC452
|
Si_location Pin | Optional subparameters to give measurement
Timing_location Die | location positions
----------
The easiest option is to add this change in BIRD189.5 in response to a
technical comment on BIRD189.4.
An alternative is to issue a new BIRD to be included in V7.0,
Bob
From: ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 9:21 AM
To: ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-editorial] Re: Unusual topic for Wednesday: BIRD161 vs.
BIRD189
Mike,
I would suggest to leave BIRD189 alone and let it get approved ASAP.
Putting BIRD161
content into 189 might delay it and that is the last thing we want to do at
this point.
As a result, I think we should consider updating BIRD161 with BIRD189
content if
necessary. If that is quick and the BIRD gets approved by the time needed
for it to be
included in the next IBIS release, fine. If it becomes a long dragged out
discussion and
can't make it for the next release, we will add it to a later version. But
that would and
should not delay BIRD189 to appear in the next IBIS version.
Thanks,
Arpad
====================================================================
From: ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mirmak, Michael
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 10:43 AM
To: ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-editorial] Unusual topic for Wednesday: BIRD161 vs. BIRD189
All,
I have convened the IBIS Editorial Task Group for Wednesday to address an
unusual topic: whether to update BIRD161 with BIRD189 information, or
whether BIRD189 should be updated to include BIRD161 features. Both
approaches have been suggested in separate conversations. Given the Open
Forum will be considering BIRD186 and 189 in the next two meetings, it's
important to resolve this while there's time for the IBIS community to
review any BIRD189 updates.
If you have suggestions on the best path for BIRD161, including dropping it
entirely, please feel free to bring them up on this reflector or in the
meeting. Thanks in advance.
- MM
