Arpad and Randy,
Per our discussion at the Editorial Committee meeting today, I
prefer a keyword based format for merged lists. In your
example, the alternative format would be:
[Merged Pins] E9 | pin it the [Pin Numbers] list
K9 M9
N1 T1 | list can span several lines and is terminated by another keyword
|
[Merged Pins] F2
G9
|
[Model Data] | keyword terminates the last [Merged Pins] assignment
..
This way all of the merged pin combinations are clearly shown rather
than "hidden" in the [Pin Numbers] list. They can be checked together
in a .pkg file for (1) each merged pin assignment is a member of the
[Pin Numbers] list, (2) the merged pins that are listed are NOT members
of the [Pin Numbers] list, (3) each set of merged pins do not contain
duplicates with other members or other [Merged Pins] assignments.
Also, this alternative syntax does not require changes to the [Pin Numbers]
processing, checking and its table generation and supports a single pass
operation.
[Merged Pins] lists, would be checked further in a .ibs file with
the [Pin Mapping] keyword POWER and GND keyword bus assignments
such that each member of [Merged Pins] list is a member of the same bus.
(Merged Pins] do not have to include all members of the bus, and
two different [Merged Pins] lists can be members of the same bus
as long as the pin numbers in [Merged Pins] are unique (already
checked).
----
Should the .ibs/[Define Package Model] issue an error or warning
if [Pin Mapping] is not defined, but [Merged Pins] is?
I have a concern about suggesting disconnecting a package model pin
(making it open) when it is not in a [Pin Numbers] or [Merged Pins] list.
While the merged pins concept is creating an electrical approximation,
the disconnecting of the other pins is contrary to its physical
implementation.
Bob
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 1:01 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Slides and BIRD draft are now posted
Hello Everyone,
This is to inform all of you that the slides and the BIRD
draft we discussed in the ATM teleconference yesterday
have been posted on the ATM website.
DATE
AUTHOR <http://www.eda.org/ibis/macromodel_wip/archive-author.html>
ORGANIZATION <http://www.eda.org/ibis/macromodel_wip/archive-org.html>
TITLE <http://www.eda.org/ibis/macromodel_wip/archive-title.html>
FORMATS
31-MAR-2015
Arpad Muranyi
Mentor Graphics
Power Pin Package Modeling BIRD draft 1
(zip
<http://www.eda.org/ibis/macromodel_wip/archive/20150331/arpadmuranyi/Power_
Pin_Package_Modeling_BIRD_draft_1.zip> )(pdf
<http://www.eda.org/ibis/macromodel_wip/archive/20150331/arpadmuranyi/Power%
20Pin%20Package%20Modeling%20BIRD%20draft%201/BIRD175_draft1d.pdf> )
31-MAR-2015
Arpad Muranyi
Mentor Graphics
Define Package Model ambiguity in IBIS 6.0
(zip
<http://www.eda.org/ibis/macromodel_wip/archive/20150331/arpadmuranyi/Define
_Package_Model_ambiguity_in_IBIS_6_0.zip> )(pdf
<http://www.eda.org/ibis/macromodel_wip/archive/20150331/arpadmuranyi/Define
%20Package%20Model%20ambiguity%20in%20IBIS%206.0/DefinePackageModel_ambiguit
y_ATM_2015_03_31.pdf> )
I included most of the comments in this BIRD draft. There
is also an example at the end, although we might want to
make it smaller for the final version of the BIRD.
I would like to encourage everyone to take a look and give
Randy or me feedback with your thoughts.
Thanks,
Arpad
==============================================================
