====================================================================== IBIS INTERCONNECT TASK GROUP http://www.ibis.org/interconnect_wip/ Mailing list: ibis-interconnect@freelists.org Archives at http://www.freelists.org/archive/ibis-interconn/ ====================================================================== Attendees from September 20 Meeting (* means attended at least using audio) ANSYS Curtis Clark Cadence Design Systems Bradley Brim Cisco David Siadat Intel Corp. Michael Mirmak* Keysight Technologies Radek Biernacki, Ming Yan Mentor, A Siemens Business Arpad Muranyi* Micron Technology Justin Butterfield*, Randy Wolff* SAE ITC Maureen Lemankiewicz, Logen Johnson Signal Integrity Software Walter Katz*, Mike LaBonte* Teraspeed Labs Bob Ross* University of Aveiro in Portugal Wael Dghais 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 6 meeting. Arpad Muranyi moved to approve the minutes. Mike LaBonte seconded. The minutes were approved without objection. - Michael called for review of the minutes from the September 8 meeting. Walter Katz moved to approve the minutes. Justin seconded. The minutes were approved without objection. Review of ARs: - Mike to make a list of remaining issues. - Mike reported that most of these are noted in the comments in the document. - Arpad to draft text on referencing. - Arpad reported that he and Walter had some discussion on this, but it is not yet resolved. The new proposal with the File_TS0 keyword may solve the issue. Walter agreed that this new keyword would solve the issue. - Bob Ross to add his changes for draft 7. - Bob mentioned that he has not done this as there are too many drafts floating around. Walter commented that there are two independent drafts, one with the the File_TS changes, and the other with the [Interconnect Model Set Group] change. He suggested that we should agree to these changes, then we can merge them as a new draft. Mike asked if the File_TS version of the document was based on draft 7. Walter proposed that we merge these changes as a draft 8, as the File_TS changes are independent. Bob asked if the File_TS changes were done to draft 7 or draft 6. Walter replied that it does not matter, as the the File_TS changes are small and can be merged with the latest draft. Mike did a quick comparison of the draft versions, and noted that the File_TS version of the BIRD was based on the draft 7 which Bob had sent out but did not have two comments added before posting by Mike. Opens: - None BIRD189.5 draft 7: Michael asked if there is any additional discussion needed for [Interconnect Model Set Group] change. Mike mentioned there are a couple of comment balloons to mark the remaining issues. Walter suggested to make the necessary changes and post as draft 8. Then he would like to take this draft to make the File_TS0 changes. Mike commented that the next remaining issue is that Radek is opposed to using the word "may" in regards to terminating unused ports. Arpad noted that Radek's usage scenario might be different than what the BIRD is intending, as we are intending on terminating ports which are not used in a given simulation. Mike clarified that Radek wants a more definite way to convey the information. For instance, if the unused port parameter is absent, then the termination should be open, while if the parameter is present, then the value shall be used as the termination. Radek would like to bring back something similar to the Unused_port_termination parameter as a directive. Walter asked if anyone would oppose adding this new directive. Michael asked if the new directive would force the EDA tool to do something. Walter suggested to have Radek make a proposal to add the new parameter. Bob preferred to have Radek propose a rewrite of the text in the BIRD draft. Walter clarified that he is suggesting for Radek to make proposed changes to the BIRD, rather than only point out an issue. Michael stated he will take an AR to discuss the issue with Radek. Mike had suggested to remove the phrase "by the EDA tool" in the Terminal line rules section. Walter commented that this section might be rewritten. Arpad added that this phrase was added to emphasize that the user does not need to manually terminate the unused ports. Mike stated that on page 34 there is a comment about [Pin Mapping] from Arpad. Arpad thought this is resolved. Bob commented that he gave a presentation on the interaction be bus_label and [Pin Mapping], also he had suggested to add some text to the BIRD. But, this text has yet to be reviewed. Arpad asked about the word "reference" in the ISS example comments. Mike commented that in the case of Example 4 the terminal is connecting to the Pulldown_ref. Arpad clarified that he would like to remove the comments about references in all of the ISS examples. Bob commented that Example 4 is a three terminal circuit from pad to buffer. Walter stated that we should allow both signalling and power delivery models. Arpad stated that in the ISS model case, all terminals are the same, and they are not distinguished as references. Walter agreed that the comment text should be removed. Arpad commented that there is a typo in the comment character in Example 5. Mike fixed this in the working draft. Randy noted the history of why the reference is mentioned was to show a best practice of not using node 0. Bob commented that all the examples need to be reviewed. He agreed that deleting the term "reference" from the ISS examples would be a good idea. Arpad thought we could call these "return path" as an alternative. Walter moved to post the latest version of BIRD189.5 as draft 8. Bob seconded. There were no objections. Walter moved to adjourn. Bob seconded. The meeting adjourned without objection.