[ibis-macro] Minutes from August ibis-atm meetings
- From: "Mike LaBonte (milabont)" <milabont@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:45:23 -0500
Minutes from August ibis-atm meetings are attached.
Mike
IBIS Macromodel Task Group
Meeting date: 03 August 2010
Members (asterisk for those attending):
Adge Hawes, IBM
* Ambrish Varma, Cadence Design Systems
Anders Ekholm, Ericsson
* Arpad Muranyi, Mentor Graphics Corp.
Barry Katz, SiSoft
* Bob Ross, Teraspeed Consulting Group
Brad Brim, Sigrity
Brad Griffin, Cadence Design Systems
Chris Herrick, Ansoft
Chris McGrath, Synopsys
* Danil Kirsanov, Ansoft
David Banas, Xilinx
Deepak Ramaswany, Ansoft
Donald Telian, consultant
Doug White, Cisco Systems
* Eckhard Lenski, Nokia-Siemens Networks
Eckhard Miersch, Sigrity
Essaid Bensoudane, ST Microelectronics
Fangyi Rao, Agilent
Ganesh Narayanaswamy, ST Micro
Gang Kang, Sigrity
Hemant Shah, Cadence Design Systems
Ian Dodd, consultant
Jerry Chuang, Xilinx
Joe Abler, IBM
John Angulo, Mentor Graphics
John Shields, Mentor Graphics
* Ken Willis, Sigrity
Kellee Crisafulli, Celsionix
* Kumar Keshavan, Sigrity
Lance Wang, Cadence Design Systems
Luis Boluna, Cisco Systems
* Michael Mirmak, Intel Corp.
* Mike LaBonte, Cisco Systems
Mike Steinberger, SiSoft
Mustansir Fanaswalla, Xilinx
Patrick O'Halloran, Tiburon Design Automation
Paul Fernando, NCSU
Pavani Jella, TI
* Radek Biernacki, Agilent (EESof)
* Randy Wolff, Micron Technology
Ray Komow, Cadence Design Systems
Richard Mellitz, Intel
Richard Ward, Texas Instruments
Samuel Mertens, Ansoft
Sam Chitwood, Sigrity
Sanjeev Gupta, Agilent
Scott McMorrow, Teraspeed Consulting Group
Shangli Wu, Cadence Design Systems
Sid Singh, Extreme Networks
Stephen Scearce, Cisco Systems
Steve Kaufer, Mentor Graphics
Steve Pytel, Ansoft
Syed Huq, Cisco Systems
Syed Sadeghi, ST Micro
Ted Mido, Synopsys
Terry Jernberg, Cadence Design Systems
Todd Westerhoff, SiSoft
Vladimir Dmitriev-Zdorov, Mentor Graphics
Vikas Gupta, Xilinx
Vuk Borich, Agilent
* Walter Katz, SiSoft
Wenyi Jin, LSI Logic
Zhen Mu, Mentor Graphics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opens:
- none
--------------------------
Call for patent disclosure:
- none
-------------
Review of ARs:
- Walter: Send updated Init_Returns_Filter BIRD to list and Mike for posting
- Done
- 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
- TBD: Propose a parameter passing syntax for the SPICE
- [External ...] also?
- TBD
- Arpad: Review the documentation (annotation) in the macro libraries.
- Deferred until a demand arises or we have nothing else to do
-------------
New Discussion:
IBIS-ISS update:
- Please provide comments, especially on structure and readability
- Arpad: Why was it posted in a new place?
- Bob: This is an official controlled location
- Bob: Did we have op-amp as a controlled source?
- Michael M: There were cross references to it
- Both marked up and plain pages are posted to make the changes visible
- Walter: We only added DC sources
- Radek: It was to create a short circuit
- Michael M: EFGH elements all use common syntax
- That chart was not originally included
- The whole chart was added in
- Arpad: The idea was to support common interconnect models, so op amp is not
needed
- Michael M: I will delete it, but other questions may be raised
- Michael M will present next week
AR: Mike L add IBIS-ISS link to work archive
AR: Michael M delete op amp from IBIS-ISS document
Ken Willis gave a presentation "Proposal for AMI Flow cases 4 & 7"
- Slide 6:
- It is only an issue for TD simulation
- Is it worth the added complexity?
- Slide 9:
- With dual models users can pick which part they want to use
- Slide 10:
- Init-based models typically allow user settings
- The EDA tool can sweep Rx settings
- There is a clean path for TD simulations of case 4
- Slide 11:
- Case 4 is rare and EDA tools can deal with it anyway
- There is no need to burden the spec to cover case 4
- Walter: Can not disagree
- Close to my option #1 "Do nothing"
- Ken: It could also be option #5 "No explicit TD flow defined"
- Walter: The deconvolution issue is with case 7, not 4
- Ken's proposal is acceptable
- Ambrish: If Rx Init has optimization the tool can take care of it
- Arpad: Then we will not submit the second flow BIRD?
- Ken: Agree
- Radek: We should describe what tools need to do
- Arpad: We should still give a reference flow
- EDA tools need to come up with the same results
- Walter showed his list of deconvolution options
- That is my #1 proposal
- We should rank them to see what is preferred
- Bob: We need to decide on Init_Returns_Filter
- Arpad: Ken's proposal rules out options 2-4
- Option 6 is also ruled out
- Option 1 would win over #5
- Ambrish: Option #1 is OK with a reference flow
- Ken: Agree
- Kumar: Is #5 based on optimization?
- Ken: #1 defines a reference flow, #5 does not
- Arpad: The issue is case #7 deconvolution
- Walter: There is no way for the EDA tool to know if Init will optimize
- A human can figure it out, but a tool can't
- Kumar: The EDA tool has to do the job either way
- We can't prescribe one method
- Some users want the EDA tool to do the optimization
- Ambrish: The tool does not always need to deconvolve with the default case
- Bob: Would a new Tool_Does_Optimization parameter solve this?
- Ambrish: The presence of Rx GetWave can help
- Kumar: Users should choose
- A boolean should not be needed
- Michael M:
- Three options:
- No adaptive EQ (RX-TX communication)
- Override with user values for testing
- Compare what the silicon does to some what-if
- How to know if the models will support these?
- Walter: Flow #1 works for all cases
- Ken: For advanced models users will have to read documentation
- Arpad: It sounds like we are settled on option #1
- Walter: We need to read it carefully
- We might want to propose words for any problematic cases
- Arpad: At the open forum it was asked when this would be submitted
- We could submit as is and review there
- Ambrish: I am preparing a proposal
- Bob: Could go either way
- There are some editorial issues
- Arpad: It already states that deconvolution may be necessary
- Ken: We should alert model makers and users about the issues soon
- Arpad: The BIRD has no major technical issues, only editorial
- Bob: I have editorial comments
- Walter: Agree that we should submit
- Bob: It takes 6 weeks to become a candidate for voting
- We decided to wait 1 week before submitting
AR: Walter send a DOC format file for his flow BIRD
Next meeting: 10 August 2010 12:00pm PT
--------
IBIS Interconnect SPICE Wish List:
1) Simulator directives
IBIS Macromodel Task Group
Meeting date: 10 August 2010
Members (asterisk for those attending):
Adge Hawes, IBM
* Ambrish Varma, Cadence Design Systems
Anders Ekholm, Ericsson
* Arpad Muranyi, Mentor Graphics Corp.
Barry Katz, SiSoft
* Bob Ross, Teraspeed Consulting Group
Brad Brim, Sigrity
Brad Griffin, Cadence Design Systems
Chris Herrick, Ansoft
Chris McGrath, Synopsys
Danil Kirsanov, Ansoft
David Banas, Xilinx
Deepak Ramaswany, Ansoft
Donald Telian, consultant
Doug White, Cisco Systems
* Eckhard Lenski, Nokia-Siemens Networks
Eckhard Miersch, Sigrity
Essaid Bensoudane, ST Microelectronics
Fangyi Rao, Agilent
Ganesh Narayanaswamy, ST Micro
Gang Kang, Sigrity
Hemant Shah, Cadence Design Systems
Ian Dodd, consultant
Jerry Chuang, Xilinx
Joe Abler, IBM
* John Angulo, Mentor Graphics
John Shields, Mentor Graphics
* Ken Willis, Sigrity
Kellee Crisafulli, Celsionix
Kumar Keshavan, Sigrity
Lance Wang, Cadence Design Systems
Luis Boluna, Cisco Systems
* Michael Mirmak, Intel Corp.
* Mike LaBonte, Cisco Systems
Mike Steinberger, SiSoft
Mustansir Fanaswalla, Xilinx
Patrick O'Halloran, Tiburon Design Automation
Paul Fernando, NCSU
Pavani Jella, TI
* Radek Biernacki, Agilent (EESof)
* Randy Wolff, Micron Technology
Ray Komow, Cadence Design Systems
Richard Mellitz, Intel
Richard Ward, Texas Instruments
Samuel Mertens, Ansoft
Sam Chitwood, Sigrity
Sanjeev Gupta, Agilent
Scott McMorrow, Teraspeed Consulting Group
Shangli Wu, Cadence Design Systems
Sid Singh, Extreme Networks
* Stephen Scearce, Cisco Systems
Steve Kaufer, Mentor Graphics
Steve Pytel, Ansoft
Syed Huq, Cisco Systems
Syed Sadeghi, ST Micro
Ted Mido, Synopsys
Terry Jernberg, Cadence Design Systems
Todd Westerhoff, SiSoft
Vladimir Dmitriev-Zdorov, Mentor Graphics
Vikas Gupta, Xilinx
Vuk Borich, Agilent
* Walter Katz, SiSoft
Wenyi Jin, LSI Logic
Zhen Mu, Mentor Graphics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opens:
- none
--------------------------
Call for patent disclosure:
- none
-------------
Review of ARs:
- Ambrish send BIRD comments
- Done
- Mike L add IBIS-ISS link to work archive
- Done
- Michael M delete op amp from IBIS-ISS document
- Discussed today
- Walter send a DOC format file for his flow BIRD
- Done
- 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
- TBD: Propose a parameter passing syntax for the SPICE
- [External ...] also?
- TBD
- Arpad: Review the documentation (annotation) in the macro libraries.
- Deferred until a demand arises or we have nothing else to do
-------------
New Discussion:
Arpad: Should IBIS-ISS be discussed in Wed interconnect meetings?
- Walter approves that
- Michael M: As long as it does not interfere with other agenda items
- Ken: Will IBIS-ISS be available from [External Model]?
- That would make it a device issue
- Arpad: That would be good, but we have not discussed it
- Walter: We thought interconnect was simple
- Active devices opens a Pandora's box of issues
- That should be separate
- Arpad: It should not be used for buffer models
- It has no controlled table sources
- Bob: It would take only a BIRD to make it an allowed language
- Walter: the controlled sources in ISS are limited, Laplace and pole-zero
- Arpad: What is the Wed agenda issue?
- Michael M: It would have to be taken up every other week
- Mike L: That is more than we have been discussing it
- We skipped discussion of IBIS-ISS here for today
AR: Michael M email ATM list to announce IBIS-ISS discussion in interconnect
group
Walter showed the BIRD "IBIS-AMI Flow Correction"
- Walter, Ken and Ambrish agreed on BIRD text
- Anyone else may be added as requester
- Arpad: Is "dual model" explained?
- Ken: Yes
- It says a dual model is OK but split is not
- Walter: Dual can use both Init and GetWave
- An explanation has been added for two problematic conditions
- Ambrish: A few more changes are needed
- Bob: The Use_Init_Output comment should be in the analysis section
- Arpad: We need to explain what is deleted
- Is Use_Init_Output still allowed and ignored, or not allowed?
- Walter: It should be ignored
- Arpad: It should not be allowed for 5.1
- Walter: A 5.0 file changed to 5.1 still has to be legal
- Bob: We should defer this
- No objection to Walter's proposal
- Radek: If it is a reserved parameter it must stay
- Walter: A graphical flow has been added, and a spreadsheet
- Yellow highlight means it doesn't support statistical
Ambrish showed his version of the document:
- Changes to Step 3 and Step 5
- This was sent to the list
- Walter: What does the RX Init expect?
- It should expect channel modified by Tx Init
- Ambrish: That is the only condition where there is an issue
- It is described in the notes
- Walter: In this case TX Init does not modify the impulse response
- The paragraph says this is problematic
- Walter: We should consider including graphics in IBIS 5.1
- Then the spreadsheet can be included
- Ambrish: The general case and special cases are not explained in the same
place
- Ken: Should we get rid the our change bars?
- Ambrish: That has been done in this version
- Arpad: We had a goal of deciding on the draft to submit
- It looks like there is still quite a bit of discussion
Walter showed his document again:
- Walter: What is the input to RX Init?
- TX Init output or hAC?
- It should always be TX Init
- This picture has existed for 2 years
- The existence of RX GetWave should not change the rule
- The BIRD sent this week should be submitted
- Ambrish: That would be OK
- Bob: We are mixing terminology like "getwave exists"
- Also introducing new terminology
- Also TX and RX note defined
- Walter: AMI_GetWave is a function name, GetWave_Exists is a parameter
- Arpad: We should also spell function and param names exactly
- Why is Walter adding Init_Modifies_Impulse?
- It should be Init_Returns_Impulse
- Walter made that correction
- Bob: Consistent terminology must be enforced
Walter: IBIS 5.1 really should be in a more clear format
- Arpad: Michael M should weigh in on that, but he has dropped off the call
- Walter: Can we submit to the open forum?
- Bob: It will be converted to plain text
- Walter: We lose the ability to track changes when we convert to text
- Mike L: We should be able to add the (DOC) file after the BIRD text link
- Ken: I can check the DOC file for spelling and consistency
- Arpad: Would we have to discuss it after?
- Bob: It could be sent to the group
- Walter sent the document to the group
AR: Ken edit the IBIS-AMI Flow Correction BIRD
Arpad: Please look at my IBIS-AMI Definitions BIRD on the web site
Next meeting: 17 August 2010 12:00pm PT
--------
IBIS Interconnect SPICE Wish List:
1) Simulator directives
IBIS Macromodel Task Group
Meeting date: 17 August 2010
Members (asterisk for those attending):
Adge Hawes, IBM
* Ambrish Varma, Cadence Design Systems
* Anders Ekholm, Ericsson
* Arpad Muranyi, Mentor Graphics Corp.
Barry Katz, SiSoft
* Bob Ross, Teraspeed Consulting Group
Brad Brim, Sigrity
Brad Griffin, Cadence Design Systems
Chris Herrick, Ansoft
Chris McGrath, Synopsys
Danil Kirsanov, Ansoft
David Banas, Xilinx
Deepak Ramaswany, Ansoft
Donald Telian, consultant
Doug White, Cisco Systems
* Eckhard Lenski, Nokia-Siemens Networks
Eckhard Miersch, Sigrity
Essaid Bensoudane, ST Microelectronics
Fangyi Rao, Agilent
Ganesh Narayanaswamy, ST Micro
Gang Kang, Sigrity
Hemant Shah, Cadence Design Systems
Ian Dodd, consultant
Jerry Chuang, Xilinx
Joe Abler, IBM
* John Angulo, Mentor Graphics
John Shields, Mentor Graphics
Ken Willis, Sigrity
Kellee Crisafulli, Celsionix
Kumar Keshavan, Sigrity
Lance Wang, Cadence Design Systems
Luis Boluna, Cisco Systems
Michael Mirmak, Intel Corp.
* Mike LaBonte, Cisco Systems
Mike Steinberger, SiSoft
* Mustansir Fanaswalla, Xilinx
Patrick O'Halloran, Tiburon Design Automation
Paul Fernando, NCSU
Pavani Jella, TI
* Radek Biernacki, Agilent (EESof)
* Randy Wolff, Micron Technology
Ray Komow, Cadence Design Systems
Richard Mellitz, Intel
Richard Ward, Texas Instruments
Samuel Mertens, Ansoft
Sam Chitwood, Sigrity
Sanjeev Gupta, Agilent
* Scott McMorrow, Teraspeed Consulting Group
Shangli Wu, Cadence Design Systems
Sid Singh, Extreme Networks
Stephen Scearce, Cisco Systems
Steve Kaufer, Mentor Graphics
Steve Pytel, Ansoft
Syed Huq, Cisco Systems
Syed Sadeghi, ST Micro
Ted Mido, Synopsys
Terry Jernberg, Cadence Design Systems
* Todd Westerhoff, SiSoft
Vladimir Dmitriev-Zdorov, Mentor Graphics
Vikas Gupta, Xilinx
Vuk Borich, Agilent
* Walter Katz, SiSoft
Wenyi Jin, LSI Logic
Zhen Mu, Mentor Graphics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opens:
- none
--------------------------
Call for patent disclosure:
- none
-------------
Review of ARs:
- Michael M: email ATM list to announce IBIS-ISS discussion in interconnect
group
- Done
- Ken: edit the IBIS-AMI Flow Correction BIRD
- Done
- Bob requested an additional change
- 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
- TBD: Propose a parameter passing syntax for the SPICE
- [External ...] also?
- TBD
- Arpad: Review the documentation (annotation) in the macro libraries.
- Deferred until a demand arises or we have nothing else to do
-------------
New Discussion:
Arpad: We still have to figure out how to deal with Use_Init_Output
Arpad showed the IBIS AMI BIRD task list and explained the items
Arpad showed the IBIS-AMI-Definition Clarifications BIRD
- Arpad would like to delete a sentence
- Some question comments from Walter are still here
- Arpad added a sentence explaining that the follow section applies to .AMI
files.
- The only comment character is pipe
- A comment from Walter asks if there is a limit to the number of lines
- Walter: There should not be
- Also the 120 character limit should not be per line
- The should apply to Description strings even if they span lines
- Lines can have more than 120 characters
- Some felt the line limit should change from a hard limit to a recommendation.
- Arpad changed it to state that lines should not exceed 120 characters.
- A comment says that .AMI differs from .IBS in whitespace rules.
- Bob: "No attempt needs to be made" is not formal spec language.
- This was changed for clarity.
- Arpad: Should we remove the details about what is an integer?
- It is from Wikipedia
- We added a scientific notation example of what is not allowed.
- Walter: We should give the range of allowable numbers
- John: Why not allow scientific notation?
- Mike: Some parsers might not support that for integers
- Scott: We should support scaling suffixes like M, etc.
- Arpad: We have a rule not allowing that
- Arpad added scientific notation examples, one OK and one out of range
- Arpad: The definition of float states they can't be integers
- Actually floating point storage can accept integers
- Walter: What is there is OK
- Mike: It would be better to discuss "parameters" instead of "numbers"
- State what each parameter type does and does not accept
- John: We are duplicating what ANSI C has specified
- Bob: ANSI describes float and integer similarly to how Walter expressed it
- Walter: There are two concepts here:
- How values are represented in an AMI file
- How it is passed to a DLL
- We moved on with no decision on this
- Arpad: Do we want to change the rule about scaling factors
- Walter: Originally the AMI file was going to be IBIS-like
- Then we changed it to reflect the parameter tree structure
- Arpad: We can discuss the scaling suffix issue in the other BIRD
- Arpad: String literals should always be in double quotes
- Allowing some strings to not be in quotes could be confusing
- Walter: Files are more readable without quotes
- Radek: Prefer to have quotes
- John: Quotes identify it as a string literal, more readable
- Mike: It may be hard to know when quotes are absolutely required
- We kept the quote requirement
AR: Arpad send updated definition clarification BIRD to Mike for posting
exercise
Next meeting: 24 August 2010 12:00pm PT
--------
IBIS Interconnect SPICE Wish List:
1) Simulator directives
Other related posts:
