[ibis-macro] Re: IBIS-ATM teleconference - Agenda for 10/6/2009
- From: "Danil Kirsanov" <dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'IBIS-ATM'" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 14:16:45 -0400
Hi Arpad,
Thank you one more time for leading this discussion. Here are my comments on
new AMI specs on behalf of Ansoft (sorry if I am re-iterating some of the
questions you answered before):
- we totally agree with the change proposed on 9/8 (TX Getwave goes in front
of channel convolution).
- for the rest of the changes, we believe that we need more discussion
before they go into the final spec. We are concerned that the AMI chart is
getting more and more complicated, while in some cases these complications
can be avoided.
For example, we believe that the simulator behavior should not depend on the
fact whether GetWave function exists or not (9/29 proposition). By
definition, this is just a non-linear part of the transmitter/receiver
algorithm that is applied on the simulation stage. If the model writer does
not need it, he should not include it in the library or should just include
an empty function. So far I do not see that any problems with this workflow.
Similarly, we are concerned about the case where in the Init function the
model returns only the impulse response of the model h_tei(), instead of
returning h_ac()*h_tei(). For many FFE algorithms h_tei is just a sum of
several delta functions, so we might see some numerical problems if engine
and model writers have different algorithms for convolution. Is the only
reason that we need h_tei separately is that some simulators might introduce
noise after transmitter but before the channel?
So it would be great if we have some examples that show why these particular
complications in AMI flow are necessary. I've seen some discussions on these
topics in the previous meetings of AMI committee, but I failed to find the
summary of those discussions (sorry if I missed something).
So, could we, for example, consider the simplest implementation of AMI
algorithm:
Initialization:
h_ac -> TX_Init -> h_ac()*h_tei() -> RX_Init -> h_ac()*h_tei()*h_rei()
Simulation:
x(t) -> TX_Getwave -> Engine convolution with h_ac()*h_tei()*h_rei() ->
RX_Getwave
It would be great if we could discuss the cases where this simple scheme
wouldn't work (assuming the model writer can write any code in Init and
Getwave).
Sorry one more time if I missed some previous arguments on this topic; I did
my best to go through the documents related to the previous AMI meetings.
Unfortunately, I won't be able to participate in today's discussion (I have
to be on AMI-promoting presentation on our road show), so I hope that you
can take our concerns into consideration, and maybe forward my e-mail to the
other people on the committee.
Thank you one more time for all your work,
Danil
-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 1:08 PM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] IBIS-ATM teleconference - Agenda for 10/6/2009
Time: October 6, 2009 Noon US Pacific Daylight Time
=====
Audio:
======
Voice dial-in: (800) 637-5822
International: +1 (647) 723-3937 <--- (For Canada)
0114501530 <--- (For Sweden)
0201400572 <--- (For Sweden Toll Free)
069509594672 <--- (For Germany)
08001014542 <--- (For Germany Toll free)
Access Code: 685-0440
Web
===
Click Here to Join Live Meeting:
http://tinyurl.com/yvmesj
or:
https://www.livemeeting.com/cc/sisoft/join?id=NKQQN3&role=attend&pw=TP8j
%23-%25%7E5
Mentor Global Crossing Teleconference commands:
http://www.globalcrossing.com/customer/collaboration/cust_ready_access_t
ips.aspx
FIRST TIME USERS: To save time before the meeting, check your
system to make sure it is compatible with Microsoft Office Live
Meeting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Agenda
======
1) Opens
2) Call for any related patent disclosures
3) Review of ARs:
Arpad: Write a clarification BIRD to discuss accuracy issues
related to the various AMI clock_tick algorithms in an
IBIS-AMI DLL
- not done yet
Todd: Update the BIRD for IBIS S-parameter box based on
feedback from discussion
- not done yet
Any other AR-s?
Old ARs:
- Arpad: Write parameter passing syntax proposal (BIRD draft)
for *-AMS models in IBIS that is consistent with the
parameter passing syntax of the AMI models
- not done
- TBD: Propose a parameter passing syntax for the SPICE
[External ...] also?
- Arpad: Review the documentation (annotation) in the macro libraries.
- deferred until a demand arises or we have nothing else to do
4) Discuss the AMI flow that was suggested in the last meeting
(Its graphical representation is on the ATM web site).
5) Discuss IBIS-ISS open questions so it could be released to the
Open Forum for review soon.
Thanks,
Arpad
=====================================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Macro website : http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/
IBIS Macro reflector: //www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Macro website : http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/
IBIS Macro reflector: //www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
Other related posts:
