================================================================================ IBIS EDITORIAL TASK GROUP http://www.ibis.org/editorial_wip/ Mailing list: ibis-editorial@freelists.org Archives at http://www.freelists.org/archive/ibis-editorial/ ================================================================================ Attendees from December 19, 2018 Meeting (* means attended at least using audio) ANSYS Curtis Clark Cadence Design Systems Bradley Brim Intel Corp. Michael Mirmak* Keysight Technologies Radek Biernacki Mentor, A Siemens Business Arpad Muranyi* Micron Technology Justin Butterfield*, Randy Wolff SiSoft Walter Katz, Mike LaBonte* Teraspeed Labs Bob Ross* Michael Mirmak convened the meeting. No patents were declared. Justin Butterfield took minutes. Review of minutes from the December 18 meeting: Mike LaBonte moved to approve. Arpad Muranyi seconded. Minutes were approved without objection. Review of ARs: - Michael to send Mike the latest checklist for posting. - Michael stated he will send the correct version to Mike to get the website fixed. - Michael to add the days for when each of the IBIS versions were approved. - Michael reported the dates have been added and there was actually an error in the third date, which is now correct. Opens: - Bob Ross noted the latest draft posted on the website is blank. Mike confirmed this is an issue and the version he received from Michael was this way. Michael will send this to Mike to re-upload. Mike will post this corrected version [AR]. Review of ver7_0_181219.docx: Michael added the exact days the previous IBIS versions were approved in Section 1. He went by the readme files which list the days of ANSI approval. Arpad stated he found one inconsistency issue coming from BIRD176, which added the [Merged Pins] features and some clarifications. The first paragraph says [Pin] keyword, but the second paragraph says [Pin] or [Package] keywords. Mike asked about the second part of the sentence in the first paragraph and if it is still correct. Arpad thought it is okay. Mike thought the [Package] keyword does not have pins and suggested we could rearrange the sentence. Arpad was hoping to only make a simple change, as the context of the second paragraph is copying the first paragraph but for power and ground pins. He proposed to copy the last sentence of the first paragraph to the second paragraph. After further discussion, Bob suggested to defer this topic. Arpad asked if it is sufficient to add the phrase "or [Package]" to the first paragraph. Mike thought it is not. Michael suggested to add this to the known issues list for the IBIS 7.0 draft. Arpad stated the second issue is in the Interconnect section. The statement "they override" could be misinterpreted to override the entire old package model. We would need to clarify what the override would really mean. Arpad suggested to say the override is for the same pins. Michael asked if this was the original intent. Arpad replied, yes, that is his understanding. Bob noted the default package model could be the coupled RLC model in some cases. Arpad thought we had left this ambiguous to leave these decisions up to the EDA tool. This only deals with overriding the legacy package keywords. Bob commented this is a technical issue where we are mixing two formats. He thought this might require a BIRD. Michael asked if we should add this to the known issues list. Bob asked if this is a technical defect worthy of delaying the release of IBIS 7.0. Arpad thought it is not; he was only trying to eliminate an ambiguous case by adding the words "for the same pins" in two places. Bob stated he is okay with adding the words only. Michael agreed this clarifies the intent and made this change in the latest draft. Michael asked what are the chances of submitting the draft to the Open Forum. Arpad replied we should not delay the submission on cosmetic issues such as the vertical spacing. Bob noted, on page 9, there is no space between different versions, while on page 10, there is one space. He suggested to make this consistent. Michael made this change. Bob stated he has a list of issues on spacing for lists. Mike stated that the white spacing is a minor issue, and he would like to submit this to the Open Forum. Arpad agreed. Bob noted we still need change the dates once it is approved. Arpad moved to submit the current IBIS 7.0 document as a draft 1 to the Open Forum. Bob seconded the motion. There were no objections. Michael will submit the draft to the Open Forum and send an announcement [AR]. Bob proposed for Michael to provide an overview of the document at the DesignCon IBIS summit. Michael stated he is planning on it, if there is time. Mike moved to adjourn. Arpad seconded. The meeting adjourned without objection. The next meeting will be determined at a later date. Open Technical Questions: 1. BIRD182: POWER and GND [Pin] signal_name as [Pin Mapping] bus_label a. Is a bus_label created even if we don't have [Pin Mapping], [Bus Label], or [Die Supply Pads] through the [Pin]? b. Is a bus_label short created for legacy package models based on the second column of [Pin] when we do not have a [Pin Mapping] entry?