Minutes from the December 11, 2019 IBIS Interconnect Task group meeting are
attached.
Regards,
Justin
================================================================================
IBIS INTERCONNECT TASK GROUP
http://www.ibis.org/interconnect_wip/ ;
Mailing list: ibis-interconnect@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Archives at //www.freelists.org/archive/ibis-interconn/ ;
================================================================================
Attendees from December 11, 2019 Meeting (* means attended at least using audio)
ANSYS Curtis Clark
Cadence Design Systems Bradley Brim
Intel Corp. Michael Mirmak*
Keysight Technologies Radek Biernacki
Mentor, A Siemens Business Arpad Muranyi*
Micron Technology Justin Butterfield*, Randy Wolff*
SiSoft Walter Katz*, Mike LaBonte
Teraspeed Labs Bob Ross*
Michael Mirmak convened the meeting. No patents were declared.
Justin Butterfield took minutes.
Review of Minutes:
- Michael called for review of the minutes from the December 4, 2019 meeting.
Randy Wolff moved to approve the minutes. Bob Ross seconded. The minutes
were approved without objection.
Review of ARs:
- Walter Katz to send out EMD draft 26.
- Michael reported this was done.
Opens:
- Bob proposed to make the terminology discussion an agenda item. This is an
editorial change throughout the document.
- Bob noted there are many references to [EMD Pin List] pin, and he proposed to
change this to EMD terminal and similarly change [Designator Pin List] pin to
designator terminal. He would like to clean this up in the document. Randy
asked if we need to define these terms. Bob noted a signal_name or bus_label
could be used in addition to a pin, and the word "terminal" includes all of
these cases. Michael asked if terminal should be capitalized. Bob
recommended to use lower case. Walter stated he has added some notes to the
document about Bob's comments. Walter suggested he can look into this change
after the meeting.
EMD Draft 26 review:
Walter noted there are still some comments from Arpad Muranyi in the document.
He would like to resolve these comments. The first comment on page 7 is about
the word "connected". Bob suggested we are mixing things, as we don't state
this section is for IO nets. Michael asked what we mean by the word
"connected", since we would like to automate the detection of the connections.
Arpad stated it is unclear if this is an extended net or two nodes that are the
same node. Walter agreed we should clarify this. He noted examples with a DC
blocking cap and differential terminations, which would only be correctly
considered shorted given the Nyquist frequency. Arpad suggested to clarify the
last sentence of the item #1. Walter suggested to add the phrase "with an
interconnect model" to the end of the sentence. Arpad agreed this is good.
Walter stated the next comment on page 7 relates to replacing "filename" with
"stem". Bob agreed with this correction. Bob noted we also need to remove the
'.' before ".emd". Walter made these changes.
The comment on page 12 asks what is the purpose of the [Designator Pin List]
keyword. Walter commented the reason for the keyword is we want to be able to
generate the extended netlist of the EMD.
On page 15, the first comment is about duplicated bullet text. Walter noted
this is fixed already and it was a typo in the second bullet, where it should
relate to the designator pin interface. Walter asked if we want to get rid of
the second bullet and combine the two bullets. Bob noted we do not want to
imply shorts, and he suggested to not combine the bullets. Arpad agreed these
changes satisfied his concern.
On page 15, the second comment is about the wording of the last sentence.
Walter stated the intent is that the rail terminals can be used, but are not
required. Randy suggested to add the phrase "available for power aware
simulation". Bob noted the model could be rails only. Arpad suggested to
change to "power delivery" and remove the phrase "without I/O terminals".
On page 20, the first comment is about two sentences which are contradictory.
Arpad asked if we can have any combination or only one of the combinations.
Walter stated these sentences are redundant. He suggested to delete the second
one.
For the second comment on page 20, Walter stated this is again redundant.
Randy noted this is a list of what could be modeled. Walter suggested to
change models to terminals in these items.
For the third comment on page 20, Arpad noted the section on voltage is
duplicated from the IBIS specification. Walter suggested to delete this
section.
The comment on page 24, notes a sentence which does not need to be there. Bob
disagreed noting this is a critical definition, where we are enumerating the
Terminal_types. Arpad stated he is okay with keeping this.
The comment on page 27 relates to a statement that pins may be terminals.
Arpad would like to clarify terminals vs. terminal lines. Walter commented
this sentence is not stating anything more than "Any one pin shall not be
included in more than one terminal of an EMD Model." Michael asked if terminal
has any special meaning. Walter noted a terminal is one instance of a node on
a subcircuit. Terminal lines are defined as the syntax. Arpad stated the
terms "terminal" and "terminal line" should be used consistently. Walter noted
a terminal line is defined as the IBIS-ISS node or Touchstone port. Randy
noted this is already defined on page 25. Walter stated he will do a scrub to
clean this up.
Bob commented, in the last example, we need to delete the multiple pins.
Walter fixed this.
Walter stated he will plan to not change pins to terminals as Bob suggested.
Michael suggested to resolve this later.
Walter commented he would like to submit this draft to the IBIS Open Forum
before DesignCon to get a BIRD number.
Walter will send out draft 27 [AR].
Next Meeting:
The next meeting will be December 18.
Arpad moved to adjourn. Randy seconded. The meeting adjourned without
objection.
================================================================================
Bin List:
EMD Comments to be Resolved:
IBIS-ISS Parser:
- IBIS-ISS parser scope document
