Fwd: Re: IBIS Minutes 10/27/95

-- [ From: Ron Christopher * EMC.Ver #2.10P ] --

Don and John Beatty,

System delay will have this same problem. A standard mechanism is
required so that the same optional buffer I/O configuration is chosen
for the IBIS model as is chosen for the abstracted delay model. The
IBIS folk believe that the criteria for choosing the proper
programmable buffer I/O model is sometimes too complex to automate
based on design data.

A standard selection file used by IBIS and the delay process could be
one answer.

Ron Christopher
------- FORWARD, Original message follows -------

> Date: Thursday, 02-Nov-95 12:42 PM
>
> From: Arpad Muranyi \ Internet:
> (arpad_muranyi@ccm.fm.intel.com)
> To: Ron Christopher \ PRODIGY: (EGJJ77A)
>
> Subject: Re: IBIS Minutes 10/27/95
>
> Text item:
>
> Jon,
>
> Reading the minutes, I see your concern about large boards. However,
I
> don't think that this can only be done through interactive user
> interface.
>
> The simulator tool could have a macro, or an external buffer
selection
> response file, or simulation configuration file, or something like
that,
> through which the "user responses" (buffer selections other than
> defaults) are all available (predetermined).
>
> With this method you have an option to do it completely invisibly (as
in a
> batch job which runs overnight), as well as through interactive user
> interface (as in experimenting and what if simulations).
>
> Arpad
>
=======================================================================
==
> ======
> BIRD30.2 - PIN PROGRAMMABLE BUFFER STRENGTHS
> Arpad Muranyi discussed BIRD30.2 with a text revision. Some
discussion
> including its relationship to DCL (Delay Calculation Language)
> standardization
> with respect to dynamically selectable buffers was initiated by Ron
> Christopher. Several ideas to select models including ordering were
> discussed. The consensus was that the actual selection basis was
too
> complicated to come to an agreement at this time. The description
syntax
> could be standardized, but proposals would have to be developed and
> considered.
>
> The current proposal allows manual selection through a graphical
user
> interface (GUI) with no standardization on descriptions. Jon Powell
> stated that this could work for One device considerations, but the
> concern
> is that it would be a very cumbersome process for working with a
large
> board with many IBIS model files from several vendors.
>
> BIRD30.2 was approved by the Vote.
>
> Proposals the improve upon BIRD30.2 would be considered.
>
>
> Text item: External Message Header
>
> The following mail header is for administrative use
> and may be ignored unless there are problems.
>
> ***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
>
> Subject: IBIS Minutes 10/27/95
> To: ibis@vhdl.org
> From: bob@icx.com ( Bob Ross)
> Date: Wed, 1 Nov 95 14:16 PST
> Message-Id: <m0tAlSJ-000GjSC@icx.com>
> Received: by icx.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.14)
> id <m0tAlSJ-000GjSC@icx.com>; Wed, 1 Nov 95 14:16 PST
> Received: by icx.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.14)
> id <m0tAlPh-000FVsC@icx.com>; Wed, 1 Nov 95 14:13 PST
> Received: from icx.com (icx.rain.com) by vhdl.vhdl.org
> (4.1/SMI-4.1/BARRNet)
> id AA09681; Wed, 1 Nov 95 14:21:15 PST
> Received: from vhdl.vhdl.org by hermes.intel.com (5.65/10.0i); Wed, 1
Nov
> 95 14:
> 19:52 -0800
> Received: from hermes.intel.com by relay.jf.intel.com with smtp
> (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0tAuTm-000twVC; Wed, 1 Nov 95 23:54 PST
>
>
>

------- FORWARD, End of original message -------
Received on Thu Nov 9 08:49:06 1995