[ibis-macro] Re: Let me clarify the benifit of getting rid of Use_Init_Output along with Digital Input to Tx GetWave
- From: "Walter Katz" <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <fangyi_rao@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 17:50:22 -0400
Fangyi,
What this meant to say is that if GetWave_Exists is False, then
Use_Init_Output should not be in the .ami file, because Use_Init_Output has
no meaning unless GetWave_Exists is True. It is my intent to remove all of
this convoluted explanation in the revised specification.
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 fangyi_rao@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:41 PM
To: wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Let me clarify the benifit of getting rid of
Use_Init_Output along with Digital Input to Tx GetWave
Hi, Walter;
Thank you for the explanation. One more question regarding getting rid of
Use_Init_Output. Current spec says that if Use_Init_Output is False,
GetWave_Exists must be True (1st line on page 8). If we remove
Use_Init_Output from the parameters, does it mean GetWave_Exists is always
True and all Tx and Rx models must implement GetWave? If this is the case,
then we can get rid of GetWave_Exists too.
Fangyi
From: Walter Katz [mailto:wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 2:34 PM
To: RAO,FANGYI (A-USA,ex1); ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ibis-macro] Re: Let me clarify the benifit of getting rid of
Use_Init_Output along with Digital Input to Tx GetWave
Fangyi,
Arpad is exactly right. I defined the digital waveform as.
| Step 4. The simulation platform produces a digital stimulus waveform.
| A digital stimulus waveform is .5 when the stimulus is "high",
| -.5 when the stimulus is "low", and may have a value between
| -.5 and .5 such transitions occur when the stimulus crosses 0.
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: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:23 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Let me clarify the benifit of getting rid of
Use_Init_Output along with Digital Input to Tx GetWave
Yes, that's how you can position the exact location
for the zero crossing to add jitter or DCD in finer
resolution than the sampling time.
Arpad
=====================================================
_____
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of fangyi_rao@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:04 PM
To: wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Let me clarify the benifit of getting rid of
Use_Init_Output along with Digital Input to Tx GetWave
Hi, Walter;
I understand that the digital input swings between -0.5 and 0.5. Is the
waveform allowed to have values between -0.5 and 0.5 during transition?
Thanks,
Fangyi
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Walter Katz
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 1:48 PM
To: Ambrish Varma; IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Let me clarify the benifit of getting rid of
Use_Init_Output along with Digital Input to Tx GetWave
Ambrish,
We have proven that the "Digital Input" to Tx GetWave is required.
The whole concept of Use_Init_Output was introduced because Kumar and
Cadence rejected requiring the model to implement the convolution of the
impulse response of the Rx linear filter in the Rx GetWave. Kumar repeated
his objection to doing this convolution in a recent IBIS-ATM meeting.
If Use_Init_Output is True then the flow of using an externally generated
waveform (e.g. Spice simulation) as input to the Rx GetWave is broken. It
breaks the flow because the EDA tool is required to convolve the output of
the Rx Init with the input to Rx GetWave. The input to Rx GetWave already
contains the loss of the channel, so does the output of Rx Init.
The argument that model writers are not capable to do this simple
convolution is condescending to say the least.
I would expect anyone who is capable of writing a model is capable of
implement the code described in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overlap-save_method
(Overlap-save algorithm for linear convolution)
H = FFT(h,N)
i = 1
while i <= Nx
il = min(i+N-1,Nx)
yt = IFFT( FFT(x(i:il),N) * H, N)
y(i : i+N-M) = yt(M : N)
i = i+N-M+1
end
So if we get rid of Use_Init_Output, we do not need Init_Returns_Filter
(although SiSoft will be generating models with this as a Model Specific
Parameter, even if it does not become a Reserved Parameter).
I have already spent many man months of effort on Analog Input to Tx
GetWave, and Use_Init_Output, and frankly I do not want to spend any more
time on it.
Walter
Walter Katz
303.449-2308
Mobile 720.333-1107
wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx
www.sisoft.com
Other related posts:
