================================================================================

IBIS INTERCONNECT TASK GROUP
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ibis.org_interconnect-5Fwip_&d=DwIGAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=DcQR-qLpQg5lIreuM6-NYECRIAFXt268PRNS5WO043M&m=gg2h9ifupvloa4rgV3x4D33eQncHTJL84gzF7u_8Eqg&s=e0xMgTUhHSiJIh9aKgjBMIj1y5JtAeFSzdE-VZ9M3fM&e=  
Mailing list: ibis-interconnect@freelists.org 
Archives at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.freelists.org_archive_ibis-2Dinterconn_&d=DwIGAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=DcQR-qLpQg5lIreuM6-NYECRIAFXt268PRNS5WO043M&m=gg2h9ifupvloa4rgV3x4D33eQncHTJL84gzF7u_8Eqg&s=45XPR6j1pknHr8Do413ML82M6JpTOrj-s0Trvb6efI8&e=  

================================================================================

Attendees from September 9, 2020 Meeting (* means attended at least using audio)

ANSYS                                Curtis Clark
Intel Corp.                          Michael Mirmak*
                                     Ifiok Umoh
                                     Eric Edwards
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*
Zuken USA                            Lance Wang*


Michael Mirmak convened the meeting.  No patents were declared. 
Justin Butterfield took minutes.


Review of Minutes:
- Michael called for review of the minutes from the September 2, 2020 meeting. 
  Michael displayed the minutes.  Michael commented in the review of minutes 
  section it states "with this change", but there was no change stated.  Justin 
  noted this was a typo.  Randy moved to approve the minutes with this 
  correction.  Lance seconded.  The minutes were approved without objection.

  
Review of ARs:   
- Michael to check if the most recent drafts have been posted to the website.
  - Michael noted there are many documents to check, and he is still working on 
    this [AR].

- Michael to add Bob's connected definitions in draft24.
  - Michael said to keep this open.  We can review where to place connected 
    definition text.

- Michael to send out EMD draft24.
  - Michael requested to keep this open to make additional changes to the draft.


Opens:
- None.


Connected Definition:
Michael reviewed the discussion from last time was regarding where to place the 
connected definition language.  The suggestion was to place this text in 
sections 13.2 and 13.6.  Michael asked if the first connected definition text 
for rail terminals can be placed in section 13.2.  Randy replied the text 
discusses the syntax that has not yet been defined.  Michael agreed we have not 
yet defined Pin_Rail.  Bob agreed this may be too early in the document.  
Michael asked if the rail terminal text applies to any specific keyword.  He 
suggested to add the rail terminal text to the end of section 13.3.  Randy 
asked about section 13.4, where we list the rules for the connections, and he 
suggested to add the text to the end of this section.  Michael agreed this 
could work.  Randy asked if we need an introductory paragraph.  Michael added 
the text to the end of section 13.4 and corrected a typo.

Michael asked if rail pins should be pin rails.  Randy replied this is talking 
about merging, but we have used rail pins elsewhere.

Michael asked about the different sections of the proposed text.  Randy noted 
there are sections for rail terminals and for I/O terminals, and for rails 
there are two cases of at one interface and designator interfaces only.  
Michael added labels for the rail terminal cases.

Michael suggested to add an introductory sentence stating there are three kinds 
of connectivity.  Michael asked what is the scope of the connectivity rules.  
Bob replied the scope includes everything in the EMD group.  Michael asked how 
the parser will determine these connections.  Bob replied the parser will bring 
in all the models for a group then apply the connection rules.  Randy agreed 
this applies with the EMD model.

Randy asked if we should move this section, as this is currently under the [EMD 
Model] keyword.  Michael thought it is okay, since all of the concepts have 
been described.  Randy thought it can be confusing to mention the EMD Group.  
Michael asked about the scope of these rules.  Randy replied the rules relate 
to signal_name, bus_label, and terminals.

Bob noted, per Walter's comments, there is a forth type of connection based on 
the extended nets, where a series element may connect different nets.  The EDA 
tool would have to identify that.  Randy noted the nets are connected through 
the series element.  Michael suggested we are not providing an exhaustive list 
of connection types, and he suggested to add this to the introduction.  Randy 
agreed and noted extended net is defined elsewhere.  Bob stated we could add a 
fourth type of connectivity.  Michael suggested to add a sentence stating that 
the EDA tool may also establish the connection with an extended net.  Bob 
commented this applies to only I/O terminals.  Randy asked if we can add this 
to the I/O terminals section.  Bob suggested we need a separate section for 
extended nets.  Michael asked Bob to come up with the text for this.  Bob 
suggested to add a new section with Michael's note regarding the EDA 
simulation.  Randy agreed this can work.


Bin List Review:
Michael went through his assigned tasks and checked a few items.  Item #15 
noted CAD does appear in EMD but not in IBIS, so we need to define the first 
occurrence.  Michael noted this is now done.

Michael commented, for item #16, there are 3 usages of the term "interconnect 
model" and 7 of "electrical model", 4 of which refer to IBIS-ISS or 
Touchstone.  Michael asked if we are okay with these, since they make sense in 
context.  Bob stated the confusion is that by interconnect we mean the model 
for the routing, but we have the Interconnect Model syntax and keywords.  Randy 
noted we have not capitalized the term "interconnect model" in these cases.  
Bob commented these are all electrical models.  Randy commented he is okay with 
using lower case "interconnect model", and he does not like "electrical 
model".  Michael noted, on page 7, there are instances of "electrical model" 
which refer to the Touchstone and IBIS-ISS.  Randy suggested to change these to 
"interconnect model".  Michael noted on the other instance is on page 13.   
Randy suggested to change the first instance on page to "electrical model of 
the interconnect".  Michael asked about the other instances of "interconnect 
model" on page 7.  Randy suggested to change these to [EMD Model].  Michael 
noted there could be one or more [EMD Model]s.  Bob noted we cannot cascade the 
models.  Michael stated we will need a more formal review of this section.  
Michael closed item #16.

Bob asked about the email regarding the examples for Touchstone.  Randy replied 
we have more work on this.

Michael will send out EMD draft24 [AR].


Next Meeting:
The next meeting will be September 16.


Randy moved to adjourn.  Bob seconded.  The meeting adjourned without 
objection.

================================================================================
Bin List:

EMD Comments to be Resolved:
(See BIRD202.1 tracking spreadsheet)

IBIS-ISS Parser:
- IBIS-ISS parser scope document