[ibis-macro] Minutes from the 7 Jan 2014 ibis-atm meeting
- From: Mike LaBonte <mike@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 16:20:25 -0500
Minutes from the 7 Jan 2014 ibis-atm meeting are attached.
Mike
IBIS Macromodel Task Group
Meeting date: 17 December 2013
Members (asterisk for those attending):
Agilent: * Fangyi Rao
* Radek Biernacki
Altera: David Banas
Julia Liu
Hazlina Ramly
ANSYS: Samuel Mertens
* Dan Dvorscak
* Curtis Clark
Steve Pytel
Luis Armenta
Arrow Electronics: Ian Dodd
Cadence Design Systems: Terry Jernberg
* Ambrish Varma
Feras Al-Hawari
* Brad Brim
Kumar Keshavan
Ken Willis
Cavium Networks: Johann Nittmann
Celsionix: Kellee Crisafulli
Cisco Systems: Ashwin Vasudevan
Syed Huq
Ericsson: Anders Ekholm
IBM: Greg Edlund
Intel: Michael Mirmak
Maxim Integrated Products: Mahbubul Bari
Hassan Rafat
Ron Olisar
Mentor Graphics: * John Angulo
Zhen Mu
Arpad Muranyi
Vladimir Dmitriev-Zdorov
Micron Technology: * Randy Wolff
* Justin Butterfield
NetLogic Microsystems: Ryan Couts
Nokia-Siemens Networks: Eckhard Lenski
QLogic Corp. James Zhou
* Andy Joy
SiSoft: * Walter Katz
* Todd Westerhoff
Doug Burns
* Mike LaBonte
Snowbush IP: Marcus Van Ierssel
ST Micro: Syed Sadeghi
Teraspeed Consulting Group: Scott McMorrow
* Bob Ross
TI: Casey Morrison
Alfred Chong
Vitesse Semiconductor: Eric Sweetman
Xilinx: Mustansir Fanaswalla
Ray Anderson
The meeting was led by Arpad Muranyi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opens:
- Arpad: We will have no meeting Jan 28, conflicts with DesignCon
--------------------------
Call for patent disclosure:
- None
-------------
Review of ARs:
-------------
New Discussion:
EBD/EMD/interconnect direction:
- Walter showed a presentation "IBIS-ISS Package Proposal Status"
- slide 5:
- Walter: We decided to support sNp models directly.
- We need rules for a few "maybes".
- slide 15:
- Walter: We need to support sparse ports.
- slide 17:
- Walter: This will be presented at the upcoming summit.
- This slide had been dropped but would like to discuss it there.
- Bob: What does model type mean here?
- Walter: It is about associating package models by [Model] Model_type
- slide 20:
- Walter: We may want distinct Delay_Corner and Xtalk_Corner.
- slide 24:
- Walter: I would like to resolve the first question here today.
- We have not yet debated the actual proposed syntax.
- The EMD syntax should be similar to package model syntax.
- Bob: On slide 7 Keywords and Sub-Params are mixed up
- Walter: Some editorial work is needed.
- Bob: On slide 24 Model_name means [Model] name?
- Walter: Yes
- Bob: How to identify different signal paths with same model name?
- Walter: There can be no joins, so they remain unique
- Bob: How is a package model chosen when it might match multiple rules?
- Walter: There are precedence rules.
- Radek: This tries to save space in the file by introducing complicated rules.
- That may not be a good idea.
- Specifying each pin will not take that much space.
- Walter: A package with 500 pins would need 500 entries.
- These concepts have been requested by users.
- Radek: Association by IBIS buffer model is good.
- We still need to solve the problem of unused ports with coupled models.
- John: Do we ever have 500 package paths that should be modeled the same?
- Or will there be a variety?
- Walter: Yes, either
- We have had to bench measure packages to get all of the connection lengths.
- John: There can be a problem of identifying victims but not distinguishing
aggressors.
- Walter: An s1000p can be used to do anything.
- The crosstalk impact must be bounded to be practical.
- This usually results in s12p models
- Vendors are gaining technology to generate detailed models.
- John: Touchstone2 sparse format would help
- Walter: IC vendors don't want to generate those
- They want a standard that sets a crosstalk limit, and that becomes the
model.
- We implement those bounded models in our tools, differently
- Vendors would like to specify those directly
- Walter: Can we decide that there will be direct Touchstone models?
- Radek: It needs to be specified carefully.
- Walter: We may fail, but I think we have decided to try.
- Walter discussed slide 22, Unconnected Port Naming Rules.
- Fangyi: Conventionally, any unconnected port is open.
- The EDA tool doesn't have to do anything, the user will connect those nodes.
- Walter: With 500 ports most will require some termination.
- Fangyi: The EDA tool should handle that, not the model.
- Radek: Then there will be different solutions in different tools.
- We are trying to specify more of the netlist, outside of IBIS-ISS.
- Walter: Vendors want to create 500 port models, knowing they will rarely all
be used.
- Fangyi: Tools can give users a selection of terminations.
- Arpad: The model maker has an idea of what should be used.
- Walter: There should be an override.
- Fangyi: Agree, the user must have final control.
- Walter: Yes, but a default should be given.
- Arpad: We might want an option to use the Touchstone reference impedance.
- Walter: That option is there, when R=0.
- Fangyi: That is not a good idea.
- Bob: On slide 20s, "p" and "n" would be better than "+" and "-".
- Walter: I will ask for at least an hour to discuss this at the summit.
AR: Walter send presentation to Mike for posting
-------------
Next meeting: 14 January 2013 12:00pm PT
-------------
IBIS Interconnect SPICE Wish List:
1) Simulator directives
Other related posts:
- » [ibis-macro] Minutes from the 7 Jan 2014 ibis-atm meeting - Mike LaBonte
