[ibis-macro] Re: Resolving a discrepancy
- From: "Walter Katz" <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "IBIS-ATM" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 17:01:45 -0400
Arpad,
I have to restate what I had already stated in
Section_AMI_Reserved_Parameters_2010_03_16.doc that was distributed to this
committee on 3/15/2010 (enclosed). I am also enclosing
Section_AMI_Language_2010_03_16.doc again. If you look at pages 4-6, you
will see a detailed explanation of how I think Default and Format (Allowed
Value Method) should interact.
| Use_Init_Output:
|
| Use_Init_Output is of usage Info and type Boolean. It
| tells the EDA platform if it needs to combine the output of
| AMI_Init with the waveform. If the model AMI_GetWave is False
| the value of Use_Init_Ouput parameter must be True.
| If Use_Init_Output=True in a Tx model with an AMI_GetWave,
then the
| output of the Tx AMI_GetWave needs to be convolved with the
output of Tx
| AMI_Init, instead of convolved with the impulse response of
the channel
| alone. If Use_Init_Output=True in a Tx model without an
AMI_GetWave, then the
| output of the Tx stimulus waveform must be convolved with an
impulse response
| that contains both the channel and the output of AMI_INIT.
| AMI_GetWave needs to be convolved with the output of Tx
| AMI_Init, instead of convolved with the impulse response of
the channel
| alone. Use_Init_Output=True in an Rx model with an
AMI_GetWave, then the
| input to the Rx AMI_GetWave needs to be convolved with the
filter only
| component of the output of Rx AMI_Init. If Use_Init_Output is
not
| specified in the .ami file then it is assumed to be False.
| Usage and Type are optional for Use_Init_Output.
| Allowed-Values must be Value.
| Examples of Use_Init_Output declaration is:
| (Use_Init_Output (Usage Info)(Type Boolean) (Value True))
| (Use_Init_Output (Value False))
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, May 13, 2010 4:43 PM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Resolving a discrepancy
That's fine with me. Are you suggesting that we should replace
the sentence on pg. 145:
"If Use_Init_Output is False, GetWave_Exists must be True."
with the one you suggested?
"If GetWave_Exists is False, then Use_Init_Output cannot be False."
or are you suggesting this to be added somewhere in the spec
in addition to what is on pg. 145?
Thanks,
Arpad
===================================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Katz [mailto:wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 3:37 PM
To: Muranyi, Arpad; IBIS-ATM
Subject: RE: [ibis-macro] Resolving a discrepancy
Arpad,
I would like to say it a different (but equivalent way):
If GetWave_Exists is False, then Use_Init_Output cannot be False.
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, May 13, 2010 4:29 PM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Resolving a discrepancy
I would like to get a resolution on a wording discrepancy that
was raised by Fngyi, I believe, in connection with the truth
table we circulated a little while ago. This doesn't change
the outcome, but it would most likely drive the parser
developer nuts...
We made a statement at some point that when GetWave doesn't
exist, we basically ignore the Use_Init_Output Boolean.
However, the current spec says on pg. 145 that:
"If Use_Init_Output is False, GetWave_Exists must be True."
This implies that when GetWave doesn't exist, Use_Init_Output
must be TRUE, but we just said that it is ignored, so why does
it have to be true?
Well, as far as I remember we also said that it is ignored
BECAUSE the only possibility we have when GetWave doesn't
exist is to take the output from the Init function, therefore
we don't care what the Use_Init_Output Boolean says we will
have to use the output of Init. This is the same as saying
that the Boolean must be TRUE.
I would suggest to change our wording and instead of saying
that Use_Init_Output is ignored, we should only say that it
must be true.
Are we all in agreement with that?
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:
