IBIS Macromodel Task Group Meeting date: 13 March 2012 Members (asterisk for those attending): Agilent: * Fangyi Rao * Radek Biernacki Altera: * David Banas Ansys: Samuel Mertens * Dan Dvorscak * Curtis Clark Arrow Electronics: Ian Dodd Cadence Design Systems: Terry Jernberg * Ambrish Varma * Feras Al-Hawari Celsionix: Kellee Crisafulli Cisco Systems: Ashwin Vasudevan Syed Huq Ericsson: Anders Ekholm IBM: * Greg Edlund Intel: Michael Mirmak LSI Logic: Wenyi Jin Maxim Integrated Products: Mahbubul Bari Mentor Graphics: John Angulo Zhen Mu * Arpad Muranyi Vladimir Dmitriev-Zdorov Micron Technology: Randy Wolff NetLogic Microsystems: Ryan Couts Nokia-Siemens Networks: Eckhard Lenski QLogic Corp. * James Zhou Sigrity: Brad Brim Kumar Keshavan Ken Willis SiSoft: Walter Katz Todd Westerhoff Doug Burns * Mike LaBonte Snowbush IP: Marcus Van Ierssel ST Micro: Syed Sadeghi Teraspeed Consulting Group: Scott McMorrow * Bob Ross TI: Casey Morrison Alfred Chong Vitesse Semiconductor: Eric Sweetman Xilinx: Mustansir Fanaswalla The meeting was lead by Arpad Muranyi ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Opens: - -------------------------- Call for patent disclosure: - None ------------- Review of ARs: - Arpad to write a new revision of BIRD 117 and 118 to generalize references to parameters in files (.ami or any) - in progress - Ambrish update BIRD 145 for pad to pin mapping and other clarifications - Need to say what it will not solve - in progress ------------- New Discussion: Arpad showed GetWave_Exists Definition (BIRD 120) - Slide 2: - Arpad: False GetWave_Exists=False has been used as a debugging tool. - This is not needed because we can see what functions are in the DLL - Some like to use it to avoid calling a prsenet but empty AMI_GetWave() - The tool might try to run a non-existent function - David: That is a model maker error - Fangyi: Even if it is present we don't know if AMI_GetWave() does the right thing - Arpad: The meaning of "implemented" is important - Slide 3: - Arpad: We should find better wording with minimal change - Slide 4: - Arpad: Should we allow GetWave_Exists to be used as a control? - Should it be renamed? - Should it be deprecated? - Slide 5: - Arpad: Proposal: change "is implemented" to "function has useful code" - This reinforces that GetWave must exist if Init_Returns_Impulse=False - David: If Init doesn't return an Impulse response then GetWave must exist - Fangyi: GetWave does not return an impulse response - Slide 6: - Arpad: Another approach is to rename it to Use_AMI_GetWave_Function - Slide 7: - Arpad: Alternatively we can say to call the function if it exists and GetWave_Exists=True - Radek: We can define what implemented means and then use it everywhere else - The slide 7 proposal should be good - The parameter would have to be Input, not Info, to be a control - Fangyi: This parameter controls the simulation flow - It does not say what is in the DLL - The red items on slide 7 should be removed - Arpad opened the IBIS 5.1 draft and searched for GetWave_exists - Arpad: On page 193 the definition says "is implemented in the model" - Fangyi: That should be modified - Ambrish: We should provide a true picture of what the DLL contains - Fangyi: It is easy to detect if the DLL has it - Ambrish: That doesn't mean it works as expected - Arpad: Both good points - The question is whether to execute it - If it is seen as a flow control the user information is the same - Radek: We could change the parameter to Input - Ambrish: It is too late for that - Fangyi: Tools also can warn if GetWave_Exists=False but the function is there - Bob: It matters more if Init_Returns_Impulse=False - We should keep the change simple - Ambrish: It should be obvious that it is a flow control parameter - Bob: "Implemented" is the wrong word - We have to say if it is to be *used* - Fangyi: GetWave_Exists and Init_Returns_Impulse can be ignored anyway - In practice the functions are simply called if present - James: BIRD 120 tells when to not use GetWave to avoid double counting - This is even when GetWave really exists - Bob: There could be a problem if GetWave_Exists or Init_Returns_Impulse is absent - Arpad: They are both required - Arpad changed the wording of slide 5 to reflect our consensus - There were no objections AR: Mike post GetWave_Exists presentation to work archive AR: Arpad send suggested GetWave_Exists wording changes to 5.1 editorial group ------------- Next meeting: 20 Mar 2012 12:00pm PT Next agenda: 1) Task list item discussions ------------- IBIS Interconnect SPICE Wish List: 1) Simulator directives