[ibis-macro] Re: Backchannel Comments
- From: "Todd Westerhoff" <twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:06:02 -0400 (EDT)
Ambrish,
That's great - so you're going to get some of these device vendors to
participate?
Todd.
Todd Westerhoff
VP, Software Products
Signal Integrity Software Inc. . www.sisoft.com
6 Clock Tower Place . Suite 250 . Maynard, MA 01754
(978) 461-0449 x24 . twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx
"I want to live like that"
-Sidewalk Prophets
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ambrish Varma
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 2:40 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Backchannel Comments
Hi Walter,
Thanks for your note.
Backchannel training is a standard feature in most, if not all the
standards going forward. We have seen it in PCIeGen3, 10GBase KR and
others (40/100Gbe etc) so far and don't see it disappearing in the coming
specifications as well. AMI models need to cope with this or we are not
going to be keeping up with the technology.
As for the need for it, I am personally working with at least a couple of
IP vendors besides the one on the BIRD. The IP division at Cadence that is
selling IP based on all of the above standards today wants Backchannel to
be supported in their AMI models per the requests of their customers.
These customers are often using Cadence IP mixed with IP from other
vendors.
As far as the cost of implementation is concerned, we are trying to solve
a technical challenge in this forum and not discussing business issues and
how to make money, albeit that is our ultimate goal.
All of IBIS developments come with significant costs which is why we
always push for general solutions and not favor continuous keyword
addition. That kind of churn adds to the bulk of the cost of development
and maintenance. The more we churn the spec, the more it costs the
industry.
Best Regards,
Ambrish.
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Walter Katz
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2013 9:32 AM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Backchannel Comments
All,
We got into the weeds a little bit on how stimulus patters need to be
defined, and we should be doing that - stimulus patterns are important,
and require flexibility in functionality and ease of input and parsing.
I would like to take a step back, and identify the cost of EDA tools
implementing back channel AMI models and IC Vendors need for such
capability in IBIS-AMI. As far as the cost to EDA vendors we can all make
that judgment for ourselves, but I think we can all agree that this is not
simple, and require man months of development and support costs.
As far as need goes, I have seen zilch form IC Vendors and Users, other
than the one supporter of this BIRD. I personally do not think we should
waste any more of our valuable time on back channel, until we get
additional support from the IC Vendor and User community, and then only
after preliminary .bci files are supplied for each SerDes standard that
supports back channel training.
Walter
Walter Katz
wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx
Phone 303.449-2308
Mobile 303.335-6156
Other related posts:
