[ibis-macro] Re: Your presentation at Asia Summit

  • From: "Muranyi, Arpad" <arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lwang@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <ibis@xxxxxxx>, <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 23:05:08 -0800

Walter,

That may be also true, but what if there are different
amount of parameters in SPICE-1, SPICE-2 etc...?  In 
that situation you will end up write a IBIS-SPICE file
that works only with SPICE-1 or SPICE-2 because the
kind of parameter is passed, and it may not work with
the "other" SPICE tool.  The issue is not so much what
format we decide in the IBIS file for the parameters,
but more what parameters are needed/supported by the
various SPICE language to which the parameter is targeted.

Arpad
==========================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Katz [mailto:wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 10:17 PM
To: lwang@xxxxxxxxxxx; Muranyi, Arpad; ibis@xxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ibis-macro] Re: Your presentation at Asia Summit

All,

Defining parameters for "SPICE" models does not necessarily mean they have
to be passed with Hspice parameter syntax. It would be perfectly OK for the
tool to process the Berkley Spice Deck, and do parameter substitution in the
Spice deck before sending it off to the simulator.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Lance Wang
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 12:27 AM
To: arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxx; ibis@xxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Your presentation at Asia Summit

Hi, Arpad,
I would like to point out two things:
1. Every standard needs to be a good helper to solve real industry
problems. If not, there is no life for it. What if standard development
speed is slower than technology growing speed, please remember there is
no way to let industry wait for it. And the reality is we will never
catch the technology growing. So, seeking other solutions is the common
way industry will go.
2. Almost there is no tool(s) will exactly follow the standard(s). They
may be behind with some features and may be ahead on some features as
well. Do you think the AMS tools you used are exactly followed AMS
standard?

Regards,

Lance Wang
Cadence Design Systems, Inc.


-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 8:09 PM
To: ibis@xxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Your presentation at Asia Summit

Ian,

I think your observation in the last paragraph of your message
is correct, but this is exactly the problem.  Whether we make
this practice legal in IBIS or not is not the issue.  The issue
is that these proprietary solutions only work with their corresponding
proprietary tools.  IBIS was started and motivated exactly to
eliminate that situation.  These requests you and Lance are talking
about is going in the exact opposite direction of the original
goal IBIS was invented for.  We might as well get rid of IBIS
and all other efforts to have any industry standard modeling
languages (*-AMS) then...

Arpad
=====================================================================




-----Original Message-----
From: Dodd, Ian [mailto:ian_dodd@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 2:52 PM
To: Muranyi, Arpad; ibis@xxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ibis-macro] Re: Your presentation at Asia Summit

Arpad,

I want to support the customer to be provided with the best solutions.

I have said many times, that I believe AMS is the best technical
solution for full circuit simulation of the newer technologies.
Unfortunately, there are two barriers to AMS adoption: the first is
getting the majority of the EDA vendors to make their best technology
available in their SI tools, the second is the training of model
creators to use a new languages. Progress is being made on both these
fronts, but it is not as fast as I would like to see.

Switching from the AMS issue to SPICE:

I think we have all agreed that for us to try to create a standard for
SPICE is not a fruitful activity.

I do believe that SI tools should be able to pass parameters to SPICE
syntax sub-circuits that represent the behavior of IBIS components. The
SI tools that implement this feature will have to know the exact syntax
(and parameter data types) to be used for each simulator that is
supported.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that at least two SI tool
vendors already have proprietary enhancements to allow parameters to be
passed to SPICE sub-circuits.

Ian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Macro website  :  http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/
IBIS Macro reflector:  http://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:  http://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:  http://www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
  To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Subject: unsubscribe

Other related posts: