IBIS Macromodel Task Group

Meeting date: 22 June 2010

Members (asterisk for those attending):
  Adge Hawes, IBM
* Ambrish Varma, Cadence Design Systems
* Anders Ekholm, Ericsson
* Arpad Muranyi, Mentor Graphics Corp.
  Barry Katz, SiSoft
* Bob Ross, Teraspeed Consulting Group
  Brad Brim, Sigrity
  Brad Griffin, Cadence Design Systems
  Chris Herrick, Ansoft
  Chris McGrath, Synopsys
  Danil Kirsanov, Ansoft
  David Banas, Xilinx
  Deepak Ramaswany, Ansoft
  Donald Telian, consultant
  Doug White, Cisco Systems
* Eckhard Lenski, Nokia-Siemens Networks
  Eckhard Miersch, Sigrity
  Essaid Bensoudane, ST Microelectronics
* Fangyi Rao, Agilent
  Ganesh Narayanaswamy, ST Micro
  Gang Kang, Sigrity
  Hemant Shah, Cadence Design Systems
  Ian Dodd, consultant
  Jerry Chuang, Xilinx
  Joe Abler, IBM
* John Angulo, Mentor Graphics
  John Shields, Mentor Graphics
  Ken Willis, Sigrity
  Kellee Crisafulli, Celsionix
  Kumar Keshavan, Sigrity
  Lance Wang, Cadence Design Systems
  Luis Boluna, Cisco Systems
  Michael Mirmak, Intel Corp.
* Mike LaBonte, Cisco Systems
  Mike Steinberger, SiSoft
  Mustansir Fanaswalla, Xilinx
  Patrick O'Halloran, Tiburon Design Automation
  Paul Fernando, NCSU
  Pavani Jella, TI
  Radek Biernacki, Agilent (EESof)
  Randy Wolff, Micron Technology
  Ray Komow, Cadence Design Systems
  Richard Mellitz, Intel
  Richard Ward, Texas Instruments
  Samuel Mertens, Ansoft
  Sam Chitwood, Sigrity
  Sanjeev Gupta, Agilent
  Scott McMorrow, Teraspeed Consulting Group
  Shangli Wu, Cadence Design Systems
  Sid Singh, Extreme Networks
  Stephen Scearce, Cisco Systems
  Steve Kaufer, Mentor Graphics
  Steve Pytel, Ansoft
  Syed Huq, Cisco Systems
  Syed Sadeghi, ST Micro
  Ted Mido, Synopsys
  Terry Jernberg, Cadence Design Systems
* Todd Westerhoff, SiSoft
  Vladimir Dmitriev-Zdorov, Mentor Graphics
  Vikas Gupta, Xilinx
  Vuk Borich, Agilent
* Walter Katz, SiSoft
  Wenyi Jin, LSI Logic
  Zhen Mu, Mentor Graphics

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opens:

- None

--------------------------
Call for patent disclosure:

- No one declared a patent.

-------------
Review of ARs:

- Arpad: update AMI Flow BIRD text
  - Done

- Arpad: start email thread on philosophy regarding GetWave_Exists
  - Not sure what this was about

- Arpad: BIRD text update
  - In progress

- Arpad:  Update section 2 text based on updated AMI flow
  - 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:    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:

Arpad showed "A problem in AMI Flow 7j":
- This is posted in the work archive
- Slide 3:
  - What boolean controls are correct for Rx Init with optimization?
  - It receives unmodified impulse response to avoid deconvolution
- Slide 4:
  - Dilemma at input to Rx Init
  - hREI(t) depends on what hTEI(t) is
- Slide 5:
  - Option 1: We have no way to know if Rx Init has optimization
  - Option 2: Sometimes would require deconvolution
  - Option 3: Even more deconvolution
  - Option 4: No deconvolution
  - Todd: Could end up with deconvolution with Init_Returns_Filter
  - Arpad: Not a 100% fool-proof solution
- Slide 6:
  - First paragraph is what we have today
  - Rx Init would take separate filter and optimizer matrixes
- Slide 7:
  - Using this drawing style to show other cases
- Arpad: Would like to conclude this today
- Fangyi: Init doesn't know if the mode is statistical or TD
- Arpad: True, but the arrows are different in each case
- Arpad and Fangyi decided it is OK as is
- Ambrish: Does the Rx model maker have to know what the Tx does?
- Arpad: No
  - The Tx model may have a duplication in Init and GetWave
  - Tx Init output should not propagate to rest of flow
- Walter: It's hard to validate these complex diagrams
  - Recommendations in 3 recent papers:
    - Sigrity 
    - Agilent 
    - SiSoft (Opal)
  - Internal vendor flows are well documented
    - Model makers departing from those should document what they do

Arpad showed Opal Flows:
- Walter: It is easy to see the 9 flow combinations in a spreadsheet
  - Better to deconvolution inside the tool than the model
- Arpad: Should EDA tools ignore booleans and use this table?
- Walter showed an Opal Flows spreadsheet
  - IC vendors should follow these recommendations
  - We are stuck because we can't deprecate
  - If they don't they have to document
- Arpad: We need to fix our spec
  - Opal is not a spec
- Walter: We should not work so hard to support our mistakes
  - Some deprecation should be allowed
- Arpad: I would appreciate feedback on the flow diagrams
- Bob: This needs to be wrapped up because it goes into IBIS
- Arpad: I write write the text BIRD now

AR: Arpad update AMI Flows and AMI BIRD text

Next meeting: 29 June 2010 12:00pm PT

--------

IBIS Interconnect SPICE Wish List:

1) Simulator directives