[ibis-macro] Re: AMI_Flows_6.pdf for today's ATM teleconference

  • From: "Walter Katz" <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "IBIS-ATM" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:26:37 -0400

Arpad,

In the IBIS 5.0 specification:

|               Use_Init_Output:
|
|               Use_Init_Output is of usage Info and type Boolean.  When
|               Use_Init_Output is set to "True", the EDA tool is
|               instructed to use the output impulse response from the
|               AMI_Init function when creating the input waveform
|               presented to the AMI_Getwave function.
|
|               If the Reserved Parameter, Use_Init_Output, is set to
|               "False", EDA tools will use the original (unfiltered)
|               impulse response of the channel when creating the input
|               waveform presented to the AMI_Getwave function.
|
|               The algorithmic model is expected to modify the waveform in
|               place.
|
|               Use_Init_Output is optional. The default value for this
|               parameter is "True".
|
|               If Use_Init_Output is False, GetWave_Exists must be True.

In what was agreed to in November, the input the Rx_Init was always hAC(t) X
hTEI(t).
In what you presented this week, the input to Rx_Init is either hAC(t) or
hAC(t) X hTEI(t), depending on the value of Tx Use_init_Output. I believe
based on the IBIS 5.0 specification above that the November flow is correct
and the Spec. correction flow that you presented this week is incorrect.

Walter

Walter Katz
303.449-2308
Mobile 720.333-1107
wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx
www.sisoft.com

-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 12:48 AM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: AMI_Flows_6.pdf for today's ATM teleconference

Here is the AMI_Flows_6.pdf file once again.  I made
the changes which were suggested to me in the last ATM
meeting.  This flow includes only the correction we
wanted to make on the existing spec flow.

I am not sure what the decision was about the last two
slides which deal with the Rx pad waveform.  Did we
say we would delete these slides altogether and not
address this capability in this BIRD?  As far as I can
tell, we can't achieve this flow without deconvolution...

Please familiarize yourselves with these slides, because
I would like to achieve closure on this flow in the ATM
teleconference tomorrow.  Comments are welcome before or
at the meeting.

Thanks,

Arpad
=========================================================

  _____

From: Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 1:39 PM
To: 'IBIS-ATM'
Subject: AMI_Flows_6.pdf for today's ATM teleconference
For those who are unable to join the meeting via
LiveMeeting, here is a new flow diagram to aid the
discussion on the subject.

Arpad
==================================================

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. ibis-macro
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2010