IBIS Macromodel Task Group Meeting date: 25 Mar 2008 Members (asterisk for those attending): Ambrish Varma, Cadence Design Systems * Arpad Muranyi, Mentor Graphics Corp. Barry Katz, SiSoft * Bob Ross, Teraspeed Consulting Group * Brad Griffin, Cadence Design Systems David Banas, Xilinx Donald Telian, consultant Doug White, Cisco Systems Essaid Bensoudane, ST Microelectronics Ganesh Narayanaswamy, ST Micro * G*** Guan, Sigrity Hemant Shah, Cadence Design Systems Ian Dodd Joe Abler, IBM * John Angulo, Mentor Graphics John Shields, Mentor Graphics Ken Willis, Cadence Design Systems Kumar, Cadence Design Systems Lance Wang, Cadence Design Systems Luis Boluna, Cisco Michael Mirmak, Intel Corp. Mike LaBonte, Cisco Systems Mike Steinberger, SiSoft Mustansir Fanaswalla, Xilinx Patrick O'Halloran, Tiburon Design Automation Paul Fernando, NCSU * Radek Biernacki, Agilent (EESof) * Randy Wolff, Micron Technology Ray Comeau, Cadence Design Systems Richard Mellitz, Intel Richard Ward, Texas Instruments Sam Chitwood, Sigrity Sanjeev Gupta, Agilent Shangli Wu, Cadence * Sid Singh, Extreme Networks Stephen Scearce, Cisco Systems Steve Pytel, Ansoft Syed Huq, Cisco Systems Syed Sadeghi, ST Micro * Terry Jernberg, Cadence Design Systems * Todd Westerhoff, SiSoft Vikas Gupta, Xilinx Vuk Borich, Agilent * Walter Katz, SiSoft -------------------------- Call for patent disclosure: - No one declared a patent. ----- Opens: None. ------------- Review of ARs: - David Banas report Xilinx position on LTI assumption for SerDes - No update - AMI BIRD authors meet to prove AMI BIRD can handle Mellitz cases - No update - Walter coordinate completion of true diff BIRD draft - In progress - Michael M. draft Eye keywords for true diff BIRD - In progress - Randy draft derating keywords for true diff BIRD - In progress - Arpad: Write parameter passing syntax proposal (BIRD draft) for *-AMS models in IBIS that is consistent with the parameter passing syntax of the AMI models - TBD - TBD: Propose a parameter passing syntax for the SPICE - [External ...] also? - TBD - Arpad: Review the documentation (annotation) in the macro libraries. - Deferred until a demand arises or we have nothing else to do ------------- New Discussion: Continue discussion on Electrical Module Description Arpad: Asked Walter how he wanted to proceed with updating the EMD proposal. Walter: There are independent tasks to be done including writing an overall BIRD of the structure of EMD and defining content of subcircuits including elements and language. He is willing to maintain the document and define the overall flow. He wants volunteers to define the SPICE meta language. Arpad: Michael Mirmak has done presentations on SPICE meta language. We should ask him to get involved. Walter: The next step is to review the presentation more slowly and discuss further. Arpad: IBIS version 5 was discussed recently. We must have BIRDs ready quickly if we want them included. Walter: He thinks it is too late to get any further BIRDs in 5.0. Randy: Agreed with Walter. He thinks we should target IBIS 5.1 for measurement and EMD BIRDs. Walter brought up his EMD presentation again. Comments below relate to the Module Interconnect Modeling Requirements slide. Bob: Will the format provide enough information to do SSO simulation? Walter: You need to know information on silicon and package to do proper SSO analysis. Subcircuits can have enough information for this, including as much or as little as is required for specific customers. Arpad: Should we include power to power coupling in the list? Walter: Power distribution (already listed in the presentation) would imply rail voltage AC coupling. Arpad: What about modeling cutouts or voids in planes? Walter: Subcircuits could be defined to handle this. Sid: Would a Power Distribution model include both DC and AC modeling? Walter: It probably could handle both, just not up to a very high frequency without including a frequency dependant model. Comments below relate to the Corners slide. Walter: It might be nice to have ranges to describe min/max lengths across a bus. Arpad: There are two types of corner definitions. One includes variations in materials, lengths, etc. The second is a behavior corner defining what corner actually generates the worst corner for SI. How do you define this? Walter: A model maker could define the corners. Randy: It is up to the simulation person to find the worst corners. I just define the variables. Walter: Yes, the model creator defines the variables that are most important. Arpad: Wants to see hierarchy of keywords defined. Comments below relate to the EMD Solution slide. Walter: [Components] refers to instances of IBIS components. [mPins] defines the pins on the periphery of the module. [Extended Nets] are connections between [mPins] and [Components] pins that span multiple CAD nets due to series and parallel terminations or differential nets. [Supply Nets] are power nets. [Interconnect Subckts] define ports as [mPins] or pins. All of these pins are at the same voltage. Arpad: Why are [Components] not in subcircuits? Walter: [Components] are like a bill of materials listing IBIS file instances. John: The advantage of allowing references from EMD to ICM is that the tool can trace port mappings. Arpad: Will email updated presentation to Mike LaBonte to post on the website. Arpad: Asked John Angulo if he still wants to discuss his topic related to adding the ability to reference a [Model] from [Circuit Call]. John: Would like to explore EMD further and can compare the EMD solution to his proposal at a later time. Next meeting: 1 April 2007 12:00pm PT -----------