IBIS Macromodel Task Group Meeting date: 08 October 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: - Arpad prepare summary of EMD, BIRD 125 & BIRD 145 - Done ------------- New Discussion: Arpad noted that the JEITA IPB discussion would have to wait until Michael Mirmak attends. Arpad showed "Package Modeling Decisions" and narrated: - Slide 2: - BIRD 125 - The keyword [Package Circuit] was invented for this. - Stacked die modeling is not addressed. - Slide 3: - BIRD 145 - Small change, quick path to success. - Could be used for package modeling if pin=pad. - Slide 4: - EMD - Supersedes EBD. - Not good for IBIS component package models. - Might take over the "cockpit" role, possibly large EDA tool changes. - Walter: EMD replaces EBD, does not take over any more than EBD does. - Slide 5: - For "EMD like" package model could have new [Pin] rules and [Die Pad]. - Walter: Again, these are IBIS issues, not specific to EMD. - Slide 6 (Walter narrated): - BIRD 125/"EMD like" Differences categorized as Inconsequential, Correctable, and Fundamental. - BIRD 125 should support Touchstone without IBIS-ISS wrapper. - Arpad: We rejected BIRD 144, which did that - BIRD 125 adds names, a level of complexity EMD does not have. - Si2 and MCP are like "EMD Like", they define properties for each terminal/port. - Subsets of terminals can be handled conveniently. - Arpad: That can be handled inside the wrappers just as well. - We can let the model makers place resistors, opens or shorts on the unused ports of the S-element inside the wrapper subcircuit. - Or, define rules for the EDA tool to handle these situations automatically. - John: The difference in implementation may not be large. - Slide 7 (Walter narrated): - This lays out the "must" requirements. - Need to decide about one-to-multiple connection requirements. - Need to abstract connections to models/NEXT/FEXT instead of pins/pads - Bob: This sounds like a big change for IBIS - Walter: We need to decide first if we need this - Brad: How does the 3rd section relate to the 1st? - For example might it say "Any DQ will use this model"? - Walter: Exactly. - John: Does deterministic mean two simulations produce the same result? - Walter: This needs to be discussed. - Slide 8: - Arpad: Do we want one solution or multiple? - Walter: Do not believe EMD needs much more work. - I believe EMD Like is more flexible than BIRD 125. - BIRD 145 would be a disaster. - So far there is no alternative to EMD as an EBD replacement. - Bob: We should have only one permanent solution, no short term solution. - BIRDs 125 and 145 are not quick solutions, they need significant work. - We need EMD Like better defined. - A clean structure like BIRD 160 combined with EMD might be good. - Brad: Can Randy's sample implementations be shared? - Randy: That should be possible. Walter showed bird145_160_example.txt: - Walter: The [Pin] list here no longer has model names. - Each [Model Call] is for one signal pin. - [Circuit Call] adds another level of indirection. - Arpad: These instantiations are not that complicated. - Walter: How do I find out which model connects to DQ0? It should have DQ in the 3rd column. - Arpad: If the 3rd column has DQ you still do not know what the model is. - The [Circuit Call] syntax is already in the spec. - Walter: There may be no models out there using [Model Call]. - Arpad: [Model Call] is not in the spec yet. - Bob: Two EDA vendors support the syntax privately. - Walter: Which IC vendors have used the syntax available on the web? - Bob: Vendors can not put out a private syntax and claim it is supported. - Arpad: Models have not been made because the languages are insufficient. - IBIS-ISS should fix that. - Bob: I think that HSPICE has been used, with a wink. - John: What is the comparison of EMD to BIRD 145? AR: Walter create EMD vs. BIRD 145 example ------------- IBIS Interconnect SPICE Wish List: 1) Simulator directives