[ibis-macro] Re: DLL debugging and validation

  • From: Essaid BENSOUDANE <essaid.bensoudane@xxxxxx>
  • To: Todd Westerhoff <twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:25:37 -0400

Thanks for your feedback. I apologize for my misunderstanding.
I totally agree with your proposal for IBIS_AMI_test. Personally I was
planning to build my own standalone test using SystemC (open source
language based on C). As the IBIS_AMI_test is now ready I will explore
it first.


On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 17:08, Todd Westerhoff wrote:
> Essaid,
> Thanks for your feedback.
> We're not trying to mandate any environment for model development, including 
> the IBIS_AMI_test
> program being turned being over to the IBIS Open Forum.  A model developer is 
> free to write, execute
> and debug their models in whatever environment they choose - assuming the 
> debugger can gain access
> to the model as you indicate. 
> The thing we're trying to accomplish with IBIS_AMI_test is to provide access 
> to an independent,
> "golden" reference when model or EDA developers interpret the API spec 
> differently.  That golden
> reference shouldn't be under the direct control of any individual company, 
> which is why we think the
> code should ultimately be maintained by the IBIS Open Forum.
> >From a purely personal standpoint, I think having a standalone executable 
> >that loads and executes
> models is a good development/debug vehicle - but there are lots of other ways 
> to approach the
> problem.  
> As far as licensing IBIS_AMI_test goes, that will be the IBIS Open Forum's 
> decision.  We were simply
> suggesting the way the Open Forum licenses IBISCHK as an example that may be 
> worth following.
> Monies from IBISCHK licensing help support different IBIS activities, and 
> since people don't usually
> stand in line to donate money to the EIA, we were simply trying to help where 
> we could.  
> Todd.
> Todd Westerhoff
> VP, Software Products
> SiSoft
> 6 Clock Tower Place, Suite 250
> Maynard, MA 01754
> (978) 461-0449 x24
> twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx
> www.sisoft.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Essaid
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 4:17 PM
> To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ibis-macro] DLL debugging and validation
> Subject: Debugging and validation
> A final product for SERDES modeling using the BIRD should allow the
> model developer to debug it's own source code under any platform. It's
> not true that the only way to debug the Dll is to have access to source
> code that load it. The C compiler allows individual file to be compiled
> on various mode (see gcc switches). Therefore you could choose to
> generate files symbol tables or not. 
> Adding any license fee for an environment to allow debugging is not
> acceptable at all. By default debugging capabilities should be included
> in the tools. Tools provider should find a solution to be able to hock
> gdb to their tools as a client. I already used similar stuff in the past
> to integrate processor C-ISS models (as slave) in some EDA tools and I
> was able to debug my code without need to have access to EDA tools
> source code. 
> Having access to both test environment and model for the current
> environment is understandable, but it should not be the rule.
> Functional validation is another issue, where the model developer should
> make sure his model much the desired functionalities. In some cases the
> model should be validated to reflect an already existing SERDES. It's
> the responsibility of the model developer to make sure the DLL he
> delivers is validated and conform to ATM specification. 
> Best regards,

IBIS Macro website  :  http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/
IBIS Macro reflector:  http://www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
  To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Subject: unsubscribe

Other related posts: