Tom, Radek, Arpad,
The EDA tool can do lots of things, but let's just leave that up to the
EDA tool. IBIS 6.0 is deficient here, but we do not need to come up with
scenarios on how to hand IBIS 6.0 models that are I/O. All the user would
need to do is set his IBIS version to 6.1, and the .ami version to 6.1,
and modify the IBIS file to change the Executable statements in the I/O
models. To Exectuable_Rx and Executable_Tx as required.
Remember, the standard requires that any IBIS 6.0 file and before can be
changes to IBIS 6.1 and all will work (except for Use_init_Output).
Walter
From: Tom Dagostino [mailto:tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 8:00 PM
To: radek_biernacki@xxxxxxxxxxxx; wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx;
Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx; ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ibis] Re: BIRD 178.2 recommendation from the ATM group
Radek
Erroring out seems very unfriendly, why not open a dialogue with the user
and ask what is desired?
Tom Dagostino
Teraspeed Labs
9999 SW Wilshire Street
Suite 102
Portland, OR 97225
971-279-5325
tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
radek_biernacki@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:radek_biernacki@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 3:30 PM
To: wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx> ; Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx> ; ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis] Re: BIRD 178.2 recommendation from the ATM group
Hi Arpad,
The user can mix/match files with different IBIS versions. As far as BIRD
178.2 is concerned it is very clear and in the case of an I/O models, the
model "Enable" will define the direction (although only one direction may
be supported, if defined as such by the model maker). Any older versions
of IBIS files should be interpreted the same way as they are today.
Executable is prohibited if the Model_type for the associated [Model] is
"I/O", "I/O_open_drain", "I/O_open_sink", "I/O_open_source", or "I/O_ECL".
Executable_Tx, Executable_Rx:
The Executable_Tx and Executable_Rx subparameters are alternatives to the
Executable subparameter, for I/O-capable buffers. The arguments (fields)
supported are syntactically identical to the Executable subparameter. At
least one Executable_Tx or one Executable_Rx subparameter is required if
the Model_type for the associated [Model] is "I/O", "I/O_open_drain",
"I/O_open_sink", "I/O_open_source", or "I/O_ECL". For all other
Model_types where [Algorithmic Model] is supported, only the Executable
subparameter is permitted. In these cases, the direction of the
associated [Algorithmic Model]s shall be assumed by the EDA tool to follow
the [Model] Model_type declaration.
It is not to the EDA tool to assume any "opposite" direction for the
"other" model. The EDA tool should rather error out if no Rx or no Tx is
present.
Radek
From: ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Walter Katz
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 11:34 AM
To: Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx> ;
ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis] Re: BIRD 178.2 recommendation from the ATM group
Arpad,
I am not sure what you mean by "uses the features".
If you mean an Algorithmic Model section in an I/O [Model], then the
problem is not defined to the EDA tool.
If you mean that a channel has an AMI model in an Output [Model], and an
AMI model in an I/O [Model], then one could argue that the AMI model in
the I/O [Model] is an Rx model. This becomes problematic if that same AMI
model in an I/O [Model] is used in a channel with an AMI model in an Input
[Model].
If you mean what happens if a .ami file has Rx Reserved Parameters and is
uses in an Output [Model], then the Rx parameters should be ignored.
Or did you mean something else?
Walter
From: ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 2:13 PM
To: ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis] Re: BIRD 178.2 recommendation from the ATM group
I would like to ask a question.
What is the EDA tool expected to do when there are two AMI models
in a channel, one which uses the features outlined in this BIRD,
and another one which is an older model without these features.
Does the assumption that the older model without these parameters
must be the "opposite type" apply in this case? If so, should
this be mentioned in the BIRD? (Or is this there already, did
I just miss it)?
Thanks,
Arpad
=====================================================================
From: Bob Ross [mailto:bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:52 PM
To: ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Muranyi, Arpad
Subject: RE: [ibis] BIRD 178.2 recommendation from the ATM group
IBIS reflector,
The pending editorial requests for the teleconference meeting are
documented below, and the BIRD178.2 with approved amendments would
become BIRD178.3.
The minor requested editorial changes involve terminology in Table 1:
Change Any to Rx, Tx
Change Rx-only to Rx
Change Tx-only to Tx
Also, after the end of the ANY OTHER BACKGROUND INFORMATION section and
before the first sentence: "Add the following text at the end of Section
10.7, .", add
"For each reserved parameter add one of these Direction choices, as
documented in Table 1
below, with the format positioned before the Descriptors heading:
Direction: Rx
Direction: Tx
Direction: Rx, Tx
Bob
From: ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:ibis-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:02 PM
To: ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis] BIRD 178.2 recommendation from the ATM group
Hello IBIS Folks,
BIRD 178.2 "Specifying Buffer Directionality for AMI" was discussed
in today's IBIS-ATM teleconference, and a vote was taken to make a
recommendation to the IBIS Open Forum to schedule a vote on it to
approve it (with a minor editorial change) in the next IBIS Open
Forum teleconference with the goal to include the BIRD in the upcoming
IBIS specification which is currently being worked on in the IBIS
Editorial Task Group.
This email serves the purpose of officially relaying this decision
and recommendation to the IBIS Open Forum.
Questions or comments will be addressed in the IBIS Open Forum
teleconference in which this BIRD is scheduled to be voted on.
Thanks,
Arpad
========================================================================
