IBIS Macromodel Task Group Meeting date: 16 July 2013 Members (asterisk for those attending): Agilent: * Fangyi Rao * Radek Biernacki Altera: David Banas Julia Liu Hazlina Ramly Andrew Joy Consulting: Andy Joy ANSYS: Samuel Mertens * Dan Dvorscak * Curtis Clark Steve Pytel Luis Armenta Arrow Electronics: Ian Dodd Cadence Design Systems: Terry Jernberg * Ambrish Varma Feras Al-Hawari Brad Brim Kumar Keshavan Ken Willis Cavium Networks: Johann Nittmann Celsionix: Kellee Crisafulli Cisco Systems: Ashwin Vasudevan Syed Huq Ericsson: Anders Ekholm IBM: Greg Edlund Intel: Michael Mirmak Maxim Integrated Products: Mahbubul Bari Hassan Rafat Ron Olisar Mentor Graphics: * John Angulo Zhen Mu * Arpad Muranyi Vladimir Dmitriev-Zdorov Micron Technology: Randy Wolff Justin Butterfield NetLogic Microsystems: Ryan Couts Nokia-Siemens Networks: Eckhard Lenski QLogic Corp. James Zhou 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 Ray Anderson The meeting was led by Arpad Muranyi ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Opens: - None -------------------------- Call for patent disclosure: - None ------------- Review of ARs: - Ambrish ask Ken Willis about reasons for jitter not being Usage Out - Done - Walter draft BIRD to allow Usage Out for jitter - Done - Fangyi discuss issues with Walter - Done ------------- New Discussion: BIRD 162: - Bob showed an email from Arpad - Bob: The first paragraph says nothing about they types of parameters used. - The second paragraph requires AMI_Init to return values. - The third paragraph requires AMI_GetWave to return values. - The tool shall not use returns for subsequent calls. - Arpad: I have elaborated a bit more on this. - It should not affect simulation results. - Radek: It should state more explicitly that it can't be used. - Walter: Why not let EDA tools use the jitter values as they wish? - Fangyi: For TX GetWave is called in chunks. - The result depends block size. - Arpad: The spec would have to describe the expectation of the tool. - Radek: It can't be left to the EDA tools. - Bob: For each parameter? - Arpad: Only if expectations differ by parameter. - Walter: Why can't the tool resimulate with the new TX jitter value? - Arpad: We just have to spell it out to avoid implementation differences. - Radek: That is more involved than what we are trying to accomplish now. - Bob: The issue is with Tx_DCD and Tx_Jitter? - We should settle it and not go back and forth - Walter: We could set a general policy and relax for specific params in the future - Radek: The wording should have "shall not be used". - Bob: I will make that change. - Bob: I don't understand the 2nd paragraph implication that it affects only TX params. - Walter: Noise is an RX parameter. - Fangyi: TX jitter can't change once the simulation starts. - The RX jitter can change, that is post-processing anyway. - Walter: RX jitter and noise could be post-processed. - But it could also be applied to clock_times, not statistically. - Fangyi: Yes it could be applied on the fly. - Bob: There will be a 162.1 ready for the Friday meeting. - Walter motioned to recommend this BIRD with changes. - Fangyi clarified the changes. - Arpad: Outputs can only be used from Init. - Fangyi seconded the motion. - There was no objection, the motion carried. AR: Bob update BIRD 162 and submit to open forum BIRD 155.1 - Fangyi showed BIRD 155.1 draft 3. - Fangyi: The model name is not passed to AMI_Init. - We could require all Dep parameters to be passed to AMI_Init. - Or we could allow a Model_Name parameter string to be passed to AMI_Init. - This is similar to DLLpath and DLLid. - Corner can be handled using a parameter with Format Corner. - Ambrish: The model would expect the parameter? - Radek: It is not required. - Bob: Why is the corner Model_Specific? - The model chooses the actual input value. - Arpad: It automatically uses the GUI settings. - Walter: The values could be integers, anything the model wants. - Arpad: If string it should be consistent with words we already use like Min, Max. - We could have a Format for [Model Selector], similar to Corner. - The list would have all available model name values. - Fangyi: The AMI file could not be used for different releases. - Only one parameter would ever use that Format. - Arpad: True. - Bob: It would be Usage In? - Fangyi: Yes. - Walter: There was a proposal to use AMI_Init for Resolve by setting the wave pointer to NULL. - Radek: There is also an issue of freeing the separate memory. - The flow would have to be spelled out. - Walter: AMI_Close would have to be called for each AMI_Init call. - Walter: At step 9 we need to say that the same parameters should be passed to AMI_Init and AMI_Resolve. - Fangyi: OK. - Arpad: If the resolver decides on a parameter how does Init know? - Ambrish: What would happen if not? - Walter: Bad things would not happen. - Ambrish: That is redundant. - Walter: Dep parameters are not passed to either Init or Resolve. - Only In and InOut are passed. - Ambrish: The is already covered in the spec, there is no confusion. - Arpad: If it can be done it will be done. - Arpad: AMI_Resolver should only get In parameters. - Walter: IT should get InOut too. - Fangyi: Init might modify those, then they are passed to Resolve. - Ambrish: The logic can prevent that. - Walter: Why would Resolve not get the same parameters as Init? - Fangyi: Resolve and Init could both modify it. - Ambrish: Resolve can not modify those. - John: Originally the DLL was out of the picture. - Now we are having complications. - Walter: No secret memory is passed from Resolve to Init. - John: Why not? - Walter: The DLLs are re-entrant, there is no memory retention. - Separate executables could be calling these. - Fangyi: Do we want solution #1 or #2? - The group agreed on solution #2. ------------- Next meeting: 23 July 2013 12:00pm PT ------------- IBIS Interconnect SPICE Wish List: 1) Simulator directives