DATE: 8/23/99
SUBJECT: 8/20/99 EIA IBIS Open Forum Meeting Minutes
VOTING MEMBERS AND 1999 PARTICIPANTS LIST:
Applied Simulation Technology Raj Raghuram*, Norio Matsui, Neven Orhanovic,
Fred Ballesteri
Avanti Nikolai Bannov
Cadence Design Mike LaBonte
Cisco Systems Syed Huq*
Compaq Bob Haller, Steve Coe, Shafir Rahman,
Maher Elasad
Cypress (Rajesh Manapat)
EMC Corporation Fabrizio Zanella
Fairchild Semiconductor [Peter LaFlamme], Craig Klem
H.A.S. Electronics (Haruny Said)
Hewlett Packard (EEsof, etc.) Paul Gregory, Henry Wu
HyperLynx (& Pads Software) Matthew Flora*, Kellee Crisafulli, Lynne Green,
John Angulo*
IBM Greg Edlund, Michael Cohen*, Praven Patel
Incases Olaf Rethmeier, Werner Rissiek, David Eagles,
Wilhelm Arnoldi, Ulrich Losch
Intel Corporation Stephen Peters*, Arpad Muranyi*, Frank Kern,
Martin Chang, Dave Moxley, Kerry Nelson,
Jeff Day, Richard Mellitz, Peter Liou,
Will Hobbs, Henri Maramis
LSI Logic (Symbios Logic) Scott King
Mentor Graphics Bob Ross*, Mohamed Mahmoud, Sherif Hammad,
Jean Oudinot, Markku Kukkanen, Martin Groeber,
Karine Loudet, Hisham Gamal, Evgeny Wasserman
Mitsubishi (Tam Cao)
Motorola (Ron Werner)
National Semiconductor Milt Schwartz*
North East Systems Associates Edward Sayre, Michael Baxter, Kathy Breda
NEC (Hiroshi Matsumoto)
Philips Semiconductor Todd Andersen, Peter Christiaans
Quantic EMC (Mike Ventham)
Siemens Bernhard Unger, Christian Mitschke,
Manfred Maurer, Peter Kaiser, Wolfram Meyer,
Gerald Bannert, Harmut Ibowski, Katja Zuleeg,
Hans Pichlmaier, Eckhard Lenski, Kortheuer Udo,
Christian Sporrer
SiQual Scott McMorrow
Texas Instruments Jean-Claude Perrin, Shankar Balasubramaniah,
Ramzi Ammar, Thomas Fisher
Time Domain Analysis Systems Dima Smolyansky
Viewlogic Systems Chris Rokusek*, Guy de Burgh*, Cary Mandel,
(Jon Powell)
VeriBest Ian Dodd
VLSI Technology D.C. Sessions
OTHER PARTICIPANTS IN 1999:
3Dfx Interactive Ken Wu
Actel Corporation Silvia Montoya
Alcatel Steven Criel
Analytical Edge Robert Easson
Applied Microelectronics Brian Sanderson
BMW Friedrich Haslinger
Bogatin Enterprise Eric Bogatin
Bosch Telecom Detlef Wolf
Celestica Danny Da Silva
ECI Telecom Daniel Adar
EIA [Patti Rusher], Cecilia Fleming*,
Dan Heinemeier
Electronique Catherine Gross
EFM Consulting Ekkehard Miersch
FCI John Ellis
High Design Technology Razvan Ene
Hitachi ULSI Hideki Fukuda
Infineon Thomas Latzel
Intracon Design Mike Osmond
Litton Systems Robert Bremer
Matsushita Atsuji Itoh
Molex Incorporated Gus Panella
Nortel Networks Martin Hall (& at Viewlogic), Calvin Trowell
Oce Printing Systems Ernst Deiringer
Praegitzer Design Rick Newell
Rockwell Collins Susan Tweeton, Ron Hau
Samsung Jung-Gun Byun, Cheol-Seung Choi
Shindengen Tsuyoshi Horigome
Signals & Systems Engineering Tom Hawkins
STMicroelectronics Fabrice Boissieres, Philippe LeFevre
StorageTek Nick Krull
Sun Microsystems Victor Chang, Kevin Ko
Tektronix Tom Brinkoetter
Teradyne Mikhail Khusid
VDOL Robert Novosel
Xilinx Susan Wu
(Unaffiliated, Retired) Bruce Wenniger
In the list above, attendees at the meeting are indicated by *. Principal
members or other active members who have not attended are in parentheses.
Participants who no longer are in the organization are in square brackets.
Upcoming Meetings: The bridge numbers for future IBIS teleconferences are as
follows:
Date Bridge Number Reservation # Passcode
September 10, 1999 (916) 356-9200 8-40170 4844642
October 1, 1999 (916) 356-9200 8-40171 4196281
October 14, 1999 IBIS Summit Meeting, No Teleconference
All meetings are 8:00 AM to 9:55 AM Pacific Time. We try to have agendas out
7 days before each Open Forum and meeting minutes out within 7 days after.
When you call into the meeting, ask for the IBIS Open Forum hosted by Will
Hobbs and give the reservation number and passcode.
NOTE: "AR" = Action Required.
-------------------------------- MINUTES -------------------------------------
INTRODUCTIONS AND MEETING QUORUM
No new participants.
MEMBERSHIP UPDATE AND TREASURER'S REPORT
Bob Ross announced that we are dropping the following companies from 1999
membership status because we have not received payment or responses on what
their intentions are: AMP, High Design Technology, Thomson-CSF and
Zuken-Redac. Thomson-CSF is no longer carried as a DAD member. Motorola
will become a full member. So we now have 30 members for 1999. The dropped
companies may rejoin when payment is received.
Guy de Burgh is getting the names of the primary and secondary contact for
each Member company, as required by EIA.
REVIEW OF MINUTES AND AR'S
The August 6, 1999 Minutes were approved without corrections.
Bob Ross noted that work has been done on the following AR's, and they will
be discussed at a later meeting:
AR - Bob Ross and Cecilia Fleming research what is needed to align the IBIS
bylaws with EP-20.
AR - Bob Ross and Cecilia write position definitions for the new positions of
Webmaster and Postmaster.
Other AR's will be discussed during the meeting.
MISCELLANY/ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
PRESS AND WEB PAGE UPDATES
Syed Huq reported that there will be some Web page updates. He also sent out
a questionnaire regarding updating the Roster. Bob Ross asked that Guy
de Burgh work with Syed to be sure the correct Member companies are noted.
Bob reported that Olaf Rethmeier is authoring an article in the July 1999
issue of the German PLUS Magazine (Produktion von Leiterplatten Und Systemen)
[Production of PCBs and Systems] that summarizes the new features of IBIS
Version 3.2. The title is 'Der neue Horizont des IBIS Standards' (The New
Horizon of the IBIS Standard) on pp. 928-932.
NEW MODELS AVAILABLE, LIBRARY UPDATE
Bob Ross reported that the Texas Instruments Logic and PC100 compliant ALVC
links have changed:
http://www.ti.com/sc/docs/tools/logic/models/ibis.htm
http://www.ti.com/sc/docs/apps/logic/pc100.htm
OPENS FOR NEW ISSUES
None.
INTERNATIONAL/EXTERNAL PROGRESS
- IEC 62014-1 (IBIS Version 2.1) - Cecilia Fleming had no further report on
the comments she forwarded to IEC in response to the letter ballot. Bob Ross
noted that the TC93 meeting is being held in Arlington, Virginia on September
22-23 and that IEC 62014-1 is on the agenda. Cecilia noted that the US TAG
(Technical Advisory Group) representative will be on sabbatical.
- pr EIAJ ED-5302 Standard for I/O Interface Model for Integrated Circuits
(IMIC) - Bob Ross had no further report.
- IEC 93/67/NP IBIS and EMC Simulation - Bob Ross had no further report.
- JC-16.2 Subcommittee: Modeling and Test - Bob Ross had no further report.
IBIS (EAST) USERS GROUP MEETINGS
Bob Ross noted that the IBIS Users Group is meeting on Wednesday, September
15, 1999 at North East Systems Associates from 3 PM to 5 PM. One major
topic will be to prepare for the IBIS Summit Meeting in October 14, 1999.
IBIS SUMMIT OCTOBER 14, 1999
Bob Ross noted that Kathy Breda sent out an early notice for planning purposes
for the IBIS Summit Meeting scheduled on Thursday, October 14, 1999 at
Marlborough, MA during the week of the PCB Conference East. Bob noted that
last year a number of companies co-sponsored the event, and we need to get
the sponsorship finalized for this year. One expected topic at the meeting
should be the IBIS Accuracy Specification document.
S2IBIS3 COMMITTEE REPORT
Michael Cohen reported on the August 13, 1999 task group meeting that the
group is working on generating a list of requirements. The next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday, August 25, 1999 from 11 AM to 1 PM Eastern Time.
COOKBOOK STATUS
Stephen Peters had no report.
IBIS MODEL REVIEW COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Matthew Flora reported no activity.
BIRD59.1 - MODEL SPEC DIAGRAMS
Bob Ross introduced BIRD59.1 which was issued to capture the changes discussed
at the August 6, 1999 Meeting. BIRD59.1 is generated to deal with some formal
letter ballot comments on SP-4557.
Bob indicated that he needed to do a minor change on one of the diagrams that
he already changed in the ver3_2.ibs documents. Bob also had some comments
to review.
One private comment from Intel dealt with an ambiguity that the [Model Spec]
keyword needs to be positioned as the first keyword after the subparameters
and before any other keyword. Bob indicated that the ibischk3 parser checks
for this and the document strongly implies this requirement:
| Usage Rules: [Model Spec] must follow all other subparameters under the
| [Model] keyword.
While this location represents good formatting practice, Bob wondered whether
we really wanted this to be a position dependent keyword or whether we wanted
to revisit this. The text could be made stronger by using "immediately
follow". "Follow" by itself can be interpreted as being positioned anywhere
after. If we want to relax the positioning, we can issue an ibischk3 bug
report to make the change. After some discussion, we agreed to leave the
document unchanged. We can deal with this issue, if necessary, as an IBIS
Version 4.0 issue. [After the meeting, Stephen Peters sent out his
interpretation that the statement implies before all other keywords. Thus
the document is consistent with the ibischk3 parser.]
Bob also questioned Stephen Peters on whether the confusion regarding the
the meaning of static overshoot is resolved. Stephen indicated that he now
understands better after further review. He suggested changing "voltage" to
"DC voltage" to distinguish the DC level from the time based dynamic overshoot
levels. Bob agreed to adopt this change.
Matthew Flora indicated that his company plans issue a BIRD to further clarify
this section. His concerns at this time are not sufficient to hold up the
approval of BIRD59.1 or the IBIS Version 3.2 document. So these proposals
will be considered for IBIS Version 4.0.
With no further comments, Bob called for a vote on BIRD59.1 with the changes
discussed above (and issued as BIRD59.2).
Amended BIRD59.1 was approved by unanimous vote.
AR - Bob Ross issue approved BIRD59.2 with the changes discussed. [Done]
AR - Bob Ross issue BIRD59.2 with the changes discussed. [Done].
BIRD60 - ELECTRICAL BOARD DESCRIPTION DIAGRAMS
Bob Ross introduced BIRD60 to deal with a letter ballot comment on SP-4557.
BIRD60 had been introduced and discussed at the August 6, 1999 meeting. Bob
indicated that two people responded privately in support of BIRD60.
After asking for any more comments, Bob called for a vote.
BIRD60 was approved by unanimous vote.
SP-4557 LETTER BALLOT COMMENTS FROM SIQUAL, INC.
Bob Ross reported that he sent out the formal responses to letter ballot
comments on SP-4557 to Intel Corporation and Cisco Systems, Inc. based on
the discussion and vote on the responses at the August 6, 1999 meeting.
The remaining item is to vote on our response to the SiQual, Inc. comments.
These were introduced and discussed at the August 6, 1999 meeting. Since
the comments were only issued shortly before that meeting we needed to
provide adequate time for people to review the comments and responses. Bob
indicated that he sent the draft responses to the comment providers and did
not receive any feedback.
Bob also noted that the uploaded UNOFFICIAL documents in the Work in Progress
directory already included the Siqual, Inc. comments (per the ARs of last
meeting):
http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/wip/
ver3_2g.ibs - UNOFFICIAL draft document of IBIS Version 3.2 showing the
changes based on responses we have approved and also based on the SiQual
responses we have discussed and other pending responses to be approved.
ver3_2.ibs - UNOFFICIAL draft document of the release document that has
the changes shown in the ver3_2g.ibs document implemented.
ver3_2.pdf - UNOFFICIAL draft document of the release document that has
the changes shown in the ver3_2g.ibs document implemented.
ver3_2.doc - UNOFFICIAL draft document of the release document that has
the changes shown in the ver3_2g.ibs document implemented.
Bob then briefly reviewed the comments noting that Comments 2, 8, and 9 had
be changed at the August 6, 1999 meeting. The proposed responses with the
changes are shown below:
-----
SiQual: 1
Editorial
Reference: Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES", paragraph 1
Suggested Change:
Change From:
| 1) The content of the files is case sensitive, except for reserved
| words and keywords. File names must be all lower case.
To (delete last sentence):
| 1) The content of the files is case sensitive, except for reserved
| words and keywords.
Rationale:
The file name restriction is redundant, and should be covered
only in paragraph 3, which pertains to file names.
Response: We agree with this Suggested Change.
SiQual: 2
Editorial
Reference: Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES", paragraph 3
Suggested Change:
Change From:
| 3) File names used in the IBIS file must only have lower case characters to
| enhance UNIX compatibility. File names should have a basename of no
| more than twenty characters followed by a period, followed by a file
| name extension of no more than three characters. File names must not
| contain characters that are illegal in DOS.
To: (shorten first sentence, replace third sentence)
| 3) File names used in the IBIS file must only have lower case characters.
| File names should have a basename of no more than twenty characters
| followed by a period ('.') , followed by a file name extension of no
| more than three characters. The file name and extension must use
| characters from the set (space, ' ', 0x20 is not included):
|
| A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
| a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z
| 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 _ ^ $ ~ ! # % & - { } ) ( @ ' `
|
| The file name and extension are recommended to be lower case on
| systems that support such names.
Rationale:
1) References to specific software or products is not precise.
2) The phrase "to enhance UNIX compatibility" is wrong.
3) The phrase "illegal in DOS" is not defined.
4) The "golden parser" code allows the following characters in file names
The allowed character set is currently defined by the "golden parser"
as (the space character, ' ', 0x20 is not included):
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 _ ^ $ ~ ! # % & - { } ) ( @ ' ` .
Note: the illegal characters are therefore:
SP(0x20) " * + , / : ; < = > ? [ \ ] | DEL(0x7F)
The period '.' should not be allowed, as it is specified as the
file name/extension delimiter.
5) From "hdr.c" (part of the "golden parser", no version info in file)
/* DOS restrictions */
if (!isalpha(*pc) && !isdigit(*pc) && (*pc != '_') &&
(*pc != '^') && (*pc != '$') && (*pc != '~') && (*pc != '!') &&
(*pc != '#') && (*pc != '%') && (*pc != '&') && (*pc != '-') &&
(*pc != '{') && (*pc != '}') && (*pc != ')') && (*pc != '(') &&
(*pc != '@') && (*pc != '\'') && (*pc != '`') && (*pc != '.'))
{
ERRLOG_LineError(
"File_name '%s' contains a character '%c' that is illegal for DOS.",
pHdr->sFile_name, *pc);
}
Response: We will make a similar Suggested Change, but with some changes.
An introductory phrase is added to give in a more general sense the reason
for the choice of characters. Also the uppercase set of characters are
removed.
| 3) To facilitate portability between operating systems, file names used in
| the IBIS file must only have lower case characters. File names should
| have a basename of no more than twenty characters followed by a period
| ('.') , followed by a file name extension of no more than three
| characters. The file name and extension must use characters from the
| set (space, ' ', 0x20 is not included):
|
| a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z
| 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 _ ^ $ ~ ! # % & - { } ) ( @ ' `
|
| The file name and extension are recommended to be lower case on
| systems that support such names.
SiQual: 3
Editorial
Reference: Section 3, Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES",
paragraph 6
Suggested Change:
Change From:
| 6) Keywords must be enclosed in square brackets, [], and must start in
| column 1 of the line.
To: (add additional sentences)
| 6) Keywords must be enclosed in square brackets, [], and must start in
| column 1 of the line. No space or tab is allowed after the opening
| bracket '[' or before the closing bracket ']'. If used, only one
| space (' ') or underscore ('_') character separates the parts of a
| multi-word keyword.
Rationale:
This is not specified by the standard, but is enforced by the "golden
parser." If required, this behavior should be spelled out in the standard.
Response: We agree with this Suggested Change, but with the following
additional clarifications: Change "after" to "immediately after" and
"before" to "immediately before".
SiQual: 4
Editorial
Reference: Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES", paragraph 14
Suggested Change:
Change From:
| 14) Only ASCII characters, as defined in ANSI Standard X3.4-1986, may be
| used in an IBIS file. The use of characters with codes greater than
| hexadecimal 07F is not allowed. Also, ASCII control characters
| (those numerically less than hexadecimal 20) are not allowed, except
| for tabs or in a line termination sequence. As mentioned in item 10
| above, the use of tab characters is discouraged.
To: (change second sentence)
| . . . The use of characters with codes greater than
| hexadecimal 07E is not allowed. . . .
Rationale:
The ASCII character DEL (0x7F) is not consistently implemented across
systems. It is often non-printable, and when printed, is not the
same on different systems.
Response: We agree with this Suggested Change.
SiQual: 5
Editorial
Reference: Section 4, "FILE HEADER INFORMATION", Keyword: [File Name]
Suggested Change:
Change From:
| Usage Rules: The file name must not be longer than 24 characters (including
| the extension). The file name must not use characters that
| are illegal in DOS. In addition, the file name must be all
| lower case, and use the extension ".ibs". The file name must
| be the actual name of the file.
To: (replace first two sentences, change third sentence)
| Usage Rules: The file name must conform to the rules in paragraph 3 of
| Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES." In
| addition, the file name must use the extension ".ibs",
| ".pkg", or ".ebd". The file name must be the actual
| name of the file.
Rationale:
1) File naming rules must be consistent and defined only in one place.
Specifically, Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES"
para 1: defines case of file names as all lower (this should move
to para 3)
para 3: defines filename length and format as twenty
character name + period + three character extension
2) To be consistent with Section 7, "PACKAGE MODELING" and section 8,
"ELECTRICAL BOARD DESCRIPTION", the ".pkg" and ".ebd" must be
allowed.
Response: We agree with this Suggested Change.
SiQual: 6
Editorial
Reference: Section 4, "FILE HEADER INFORMATION", Keyword: [Comment Char]
Suggested Change:
Change From:
| Usage Rules: The new comment character to be defined must be followed by
| the underscore character and the letters "char". For example:
| "|_char" redundantly redefines the comment character to be
| the pipe character. The new comment character is in effect
| only following the [Comment Char] keyword. The following
| characters MAY NOT be used: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P
| Q R S T U V W X Y Z a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u
| v w x y z 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [ ] . _ / = + -
To: (change last sentence)
| . . . The following
| characters MAY be used:
|
| ! " # $ % & ' * , : ; < > ? @ ^ ` | ~
Rationale:
1) For clarity, definition of a limited set of characters should
be terms of those allowed, not those disallowed.
2) Based on the current wording and paragraph 14 of section three,
the allowed [Comment Char] list is (ASCII hex shown first):
| 20 SP | 21 ! | 22 " | 23 # | 24 $ | 25 % | 26 & | 27 ' |
| 28 ( | 29 ) | 2A * | | 2C , | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | 3A : | 3B ; | 3C < | | 3E > | 3F ? |
| 40 @ | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | 5C \ | | 5E ^ | |
| 60 ` | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | 7B { | 7C | | 7D } | 7E ~ | 7F DEL|
Of this list:
0x20 'SP' - is wrong
0x7F 'DEL' - is inconsistently implemented across systems
0x5C '\' - is commonly used as an escape meta-character
0x28 '(', 0x29 ')' - paired delimiters should be reserved for future
0x7B '(', 0x7D ')' use by the standard
3) The "golden parser" program 'ibischk3' implements per the standard:
From "parse.c" (part of the "golden parser", no version info in file)
/* list of chars that cannot be the comment char */
static char gpcBadCommChars[] =
"0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[]._/=+-";
Response: We agree that the permitted comment characters should be listed
as suggested. However, since the `\', `(', `)', `{', and `}' characters
are already permitted by the standard and by the ibischk3 parser code,
we are including them in the list. We may consider reducing the number
of permitted comment characters in IBIS Version 4.0. The amended list is
| ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * , : ; < > ? @ \ ^ ` { | } ~
SiQual: 7
Editorial
Reference: Section 5, "COMPONENT DESCRIPTION"; [Component] keyword,
Sub-Param Usage Rules, paragraph 3
Suggested Change:
Change From:
| . . . The default location is at the 'Pin'.
| However, the 'Die' location is also available for either or
| and both subparameters.
To (shorten existing second sentence, then insert new second sentence):
| . . . Allowed values for either sub-parameter
| are 'Die' or 'Pin'. The default location is at the 'Pin'.
Rationale:
Clarification of wording.
Response: We agree with this Suggested Change.
SiQual: 8
Editorial
Reference: Section 6a, "ADD SUBMODEL DESCRIPTION";
sub-section "SUBMODEL:", paragraph 4
Suggested Change:
Change From:
< Move paragraph 4 and list of keywords to the [Submodel] keyword description >
| The following set of keywords that are defined under the [Model] keyword are
| support by the [Submodel] keyword:
|
| [Pulldown]
| [Pullup]
| [GND Clamp]
| [POWER Clamp]
| [Ramp]
| [Rising Waveform]
| [Falling Waveform]
To (correct spelling of "supported" in first sentence, add new paragraph):
| The only required subparameter in [Submodel] is Submodel_type to define the
| list of submodel types. The other subparameters under [Model] are not
| permitted under the [Submodel] keyword.
|
| The following set of keywords that are defined under the [Model] keyword are
| supported by the [Submodel] keyword:
|
| [Pulldown]
| [Pullup]
| [GND Clamp]
| [POWER Clamp]
| [Ramp]
| [Rising Waveform]
| [Falling Waveform]
| At least one of the [Pulldown], [Pullup], [GND Clamp], [POWER Clamp] is <
| required. If the [Submodel] describes a driver, the [Ramp] keyword is <
| required. <
Rationale:
The initial text is redundant, since the proper location is in the [Submodel]
keyword description. The additional paragraph stipulates that some reason
must exist for a [Submodel] definition.
Response: We agree with some of the Suggested Changes and will make a related
editorial correction. We do not plan to move the set of keywords, as
suggested since it would destroy the context of some other paragraphs. We
did not add the last paragraph, as suggested. Instead we add a sentence in
the last paragraph to refer to other sections for specific details on what is
required.
The proposed revision follows from the suggestions above until the end of
the section are as follows (|* lines indicate changes or additions):
| The only required subparameter in [Submodel] is Submodel_type to define the
|*list of submodel types. No subparameters under [Model] are permitted under
|*the [Submodel] keyword.
|
| The following set of keywords that are defined under the [Model] keyword are
|*supported by the [Submodel] keyword:
|
| [Pulldown]
| [Pullup]
| [GND Clamp]
| [POWER Clamp]
| [Ramp]
| [Rising Waveform]
| [Falling Waveform]
|
| The [Voltage Range], [Pullup Reference], [Pulldown Reference], [GND Clamp
| Reference], and [POWER Clamp Reference] keywords are not permitted. The
| voltage settings are inherited from the top-level model.
|
| These additional keywords are used only for the [Submodel] are documented
| in this section:
|
| [Submodel Spec]
| [GND Pulse Table]
| [POWER Pulse Table]
|
| The application of these keywords depends upon the Submodel_type entries
| listed below:
|
| Dynamic_clamp
| Bus_hold
|
| Permitted keywords that are not defined for any of these submodel types are
|*ignored. The rules for what set of keywords are required are found under
|*the Dynamic Clamp and Bus Hold headings of this section.
Reason: The second sentence in the first paragraph made a reference to
common subparameters. This no longer exists and the wording is corrected.
The top-level description in the SUBMODEL: section gives details of other
keywords as well, and removing this "redundant" section would destroy to
context of the descriptions.
In the [Submodel] keyword description, the list of permitted keyword are
given in the "Other Notes:" section. However the rules for what is required
depend on the Submodel_type selection and are discussed later.
SiQual: 9
Editorial
Reference: Section 6a, "ADD SUBMODEL DESCRIPTION"; keyword [Submodel];
Sub-Param Usage Rules, paragraph _
Suggested Change:
Change From:
| . . . The
| submodel name must match the one that is listed under the
| [Add Submodel]
To (in second sentence, change "under the" to "under a"):
| . . . The
| submodel name must match the one that is listed under a
| [Add Submodel] keyword . . .
Rationale:
The wording is not correct.
Response: We agree with this Suggested Change with the following
modifications or additions: Change "a" to "an" and also add "a" to
similar text for the [Model] keyword on page 20.
-----
After asking for any further discussion, Bob called for a vote.
The above responses to SiQual, Inc. letter ballot comments were approved by
a unanimous vote.
AR - Bob Ross send out the formal responses to SiQual, Inc. [Done]
RELEASE OF VERSION 3.2 TO EIA FOR EIA-656-A
Bob Ross noted that several other items were raised briefly raised at the
August 6, 1999 meeting. However, at that time the people indicated that they
were not serious enough to hold up the ratification of Verison 3.2.
Bob noted that his comment regarding "BIRD" being undefined was not correct.
However he did update "10" BIRDs to "12" BIRDs to reflect inclusion of
BIRD59.2 and BIRD60 and also revised the wording slightly.
Ian Dodd had comments concerning EBD technical details: (1) the eight
character limit on pins, (2) How EBD files plug into ground planes, and (3)
whether loops are supported. While these are all good questions, Bob felt
that some of these concerns were either technical issues or else might be
resolved based on further understanding of the exact question. For example,
while loops were not intended to be supported, the syntax may already allow
doing loops (using a zero Ohm series resistor) IF the EDA tool needed to
provide such support. The other concerns may also be resolved after further
investigation of the exact concern. Otherwise they could be considered as
added functionality for IBIS Version 4.0.
The issue raised by Matthew Flora on whether [Driver Schedule] could reference
a [Model Selector] name could be considered an extension, if needed. Bob
felt that the authors did not intent that this be allowed.
Bob noted that in the process of generating ver3_2.pdf, Arpad Muranyi made a
few minor mistakes. Bob corrected them. Bob also reported that he did another
quick editorial pass and corrected a few more minor mistakes. Bob reported
on a few of them.
After asking for any further comments, Bob called for a vote on releasing
the corrected document to EIA for EIA-656-A adoption.
Release of the corrected ver3_2.ibs document was approved by unanimous vote.
Bob commented that based on discussions with Cecilia Fleming, that this
approved document (date August 20, 1999) could be considered EIA-656-A.
The letter ballot results of 18 Yes and 0 No indicated overwhelming approval,
and we had completed our obligation to provide responses to the comments.
Cecilia needs to receive the official document. She may need to provide
some official EIA cover pages to the document to create the official document
that would be distributed by Globe Engineering and would be forwarded to ANSI.
Bob outlined the remaining steps:
Send to EIA the updated ver3_2.txt document on August 20, 1999 [Done]
Send to Arpad Muranyi the same document so that he can generate the
Adobe Acrobat and Word versions. [Done]
Bob and Arpad work with Cecilia on document preparation, if necessary
including using any of the above versions for the official EIA-656-A
document.
Arpad suggested that the Table of Contents could also list the subparameters.
Bob stated that while this would be useful, he did not want to add this
level of detail at this time because of the risk of introducing some errors.
For example, some subparameters might be unintentionally omitted because
they appear on the next line.
Bob then speculated that the release of EIA-656-A might occur in about a
month. The ANSI ballot on Version 3.2 has already occurred and no comments
were received (indicating approval). So all that is needed is that ANSI
receives the official document and it is released by the ANSI processes.
Bob then concluded that we will plan to forward the ratified ANSI/EIA-656-A
document to IEC to trail along the pending IEC 62014-1 document.
BUG34 - NO ERROR REPORTED FOR MISSING V/I TABLE IN OUTPUT BUFFERS
Bob Ross indicated that we need to consider resources to handle this and
future bugs. Minor ones might be handled by Matthew Flora and Chris Rokusek.
BUG34 still needs further work per Matthew Flora's open AR:
AR - Matthew Flora issue a revised BUG34 to document the conditions where
Warning messages are issued.
BUG36 - RESERVE WORDS ERROR FOR PIN MAPPING AND SERIES PIN MAPPING
Bob Ross introduced BUG36 submitted June 1999 by Atul Agarwal. It concerned
the fact the fix associated with BUG8 for using reserved words for [Pin]
did not fix the problem when the same reserved words were used with [Diff Pin
Mapping], [Pin Mapping] and [Series Pin Mapping]. Atul had noted that the
fix was simple.
Bob classified BUG36 as ANNOYING, LOW, and OPEN.
BUG37 - PIN MAPPING FOR UNIQUE GND AND POWER PIN GENERATES ERROR
Bob Ross introduced BUG37, also submitted by Atul Agarwal in June 1999. It
deal with a technical detail that any unique entry must be specified with
at least one pin whose model type is POWER or GND. Atul also supplied the
suggested simple changes to several lines of code which will fix this problem.
Bob classified BUG37 as ANNOYING, LOW, and OPEN.
ACCURACY SPECIFICATION DISCUSSION
Bob Ross introduced the Accuracy Specification discussion by noting that this
discussion had been deferred several times because of the IBIS Version 3.2
comment resolution processes that we have just completed. This along with
several other activities (such as the connector specification) are currently
stalled. Either the IBIS Open Forum or the task group needs to actively
carry get involved in these activities. Because the Accuracy Specification
discussion had been deferred, he only expected some introductory comments
to be made.
Bob noted that Waveform comparison metrics were discussed on the Signal
Integrity reflector in July 1999 in response to a question raised by Alex
Levin of Intel. This is related to one of the aspects of the Accuracy
Specification document.
Bob then gave BRIEF overview of Version 1.2 Accuracy Specification document
that is uploaded in the following directory:
http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/accuracy/
Bob stated that it focused on comparing IBIS models to physical device
measurements though a two step process to eliminate possible EDA tool
accuracy or algorithm issues. The physical device measurements are correlated
with an internal reference against which the simulation tool can also be
correlated. A large portion of the document deals with measurement set up
details and measurement equipment requirements.
Three levels of correlation are tabulated based on the reference component
sample. The comparisons can be based on Envelope metrics (the device
measurements must fit inside the min and max condition data or simulations),
or overlay metrics (direct overlaying comparisons). The devices can be
random, known typical or known typical, slow, and fast.
Correlation details were discussed including the notion that some metrics
and related figure of merit calculations can be based on voltage comparison
(vertical axis) or on time comparisons (horizontal axis) time domain data
and simulations.
The document provides methods of measuring and correlating the C_comp die
capacitance.
Finally, an Accuracy trailer document that needs some further refinement is
associated with the Accuracy Specification to capture the correlation results.
Bob then opened the meeting for a short discussion on this topic. Arpad
Muranyi noted that he felt the Signal Integrity reflector discussion brought
up many issues that pointed to the difficulty in doing meaningful correlation.
It is a difficult problem.
Bob provided just a few of his thoughts. He would like to see the methodology
generalized to apply to comparison and correlation against any reference such
as Spice simulations. He also noted that some of the exact correlation
was diluted by test board set of equipment tolerances. However, the process
did provide equipment requirements and allowed documenting the equipment.
Finally he noted that there is a difference between doing correlation between
simulation or measurement time domain results and also doing a correlation
between measurements and internal model tables or parameters.
Milt Schwartz noted that he was dealing with internal problems associated
with factoring in measurement equipment accuracy and scope measurements.
Further, he had some concerns on some additional parameters such as ring back.
Stephen Peters indicated that some of his concerns might be related to the
BIRD61 issue discussed next.
Bob indicated that this preliminary discussion would be continued.
BIRD61 - ENHANCED CHARACTERIZATION OF RECEIVERS
Stephen Peters introduced BIRD61 by stating that he along with D.C. Sessions,
Richard Mellitz, and Arpad Muranyi met for a day to discuss behavioral models
for receivers. They determined that internal delays that now need to be
considered are a function of both overdrive and slew rate.
BIRD61 is a draft proposal for IBIS Version 4.0 that attempts to capture
the relationships with [Receiver Delay] tables. Furthermore a subsequent
"golden input waveform" proposal may follow that assists in testing and
calibrating the processing algorithms to the information supplied. Stephen
covered some details and noted that EDA vendors need to comment on whether
the data is useful. Bob Ross noted that there have been about 16 e-mail
comments and responses so far including valuable comments and concerns from
EDA vendors.
Bob questioned whether the intention was to capture delays as a function of
all three parameters - start, end, and slope, and Stephen responded yes.
Bob also wondered if at least two [Receiver Delay] tables should be required
for the rising edge and two for the falling edge. He felt that we needed to
actually come up with more precise data that can be used in a consistent manner.
This could be based on really requiring a full 3-dimensional characterization
of all of the parameters (start time, end time, slope) or perhaps do a real
equation fit which the model provider could validate through Monte Carlo
methods on their proprietary sources. Furthermore, the data that the
receiver will use at the Input might need to be classified or constrained in
some manner associated with the relevance of the problem.
The problem is two-fold. We need to be able to extract the parameters from
the input waveform in a meaningful manner. For example, is this model
expected to apply to any waveform or does it require a monotonic transition
where data can be captured? Are there realistic Input waveform constraints
that need to be specified for table to be applicable? Secondly, we need
as much information as necessary so that we can make accurate predictions
in a known or consistent manner. That may involve requiring a lot of data
so that 3-dimensional interpolation can be used or perhaps specifying the
derived and validated (best fit) transfer equation.
Stephen noted that there are cases in the table where no transition occurred.
This indicates a need for infinity in the table. Matthew Flora commented on
the problems of using the new reserved word INF for infinity. Bob also was
concerned about INF.
A few other points were raised in this introductory discussion, such as
providing a reference/validation waveform where the user can provide a V-T
table and indicate where the output switches. Bob expressed optimism as
the meeting concluded that we could all work together in refining the
proposal to a satisfactory level.
CONNECTOR PROPOSAL STATUS
Not discussed.
NUMBER OF POINTS IN VT TABLE
Not discussed.
NEXT MEETING:
The next teleconference meeting will be on Friday, September 10, 1999 from 8:00
AM to 10:00 AM.
==============================================================================
NOTES
IBIS CHAIR: Bob Ross (503) 685-0732, Fax (503) 685-4897
bob_ross@mentorg.com
Modeling Engineer, Mentor Graphics
8005 S.W. Boeckman Road, Wilsonville, OR 97070
VICE CHAIR: Stephen Peters (503) 264-4108, Fax: (503) 264-4515
sjpeters@ichips.intel.com
Senior Hardware Engineer, Intel Corporation
M/S JF1-209
2111 NE 25th Ave.
Hillsboro, OR 97124-5961
SECRETARY: Guy de Burgh (805) 988-8250, Fax: (805) 988-8259
gdeburgh@viewlogic.com
Senior Manager, Viewlogic Systems
1369 Del Norte Rd.
Camarillo, CA 93010-8437
LIBRARIAN: Jon Powell (805) 988-8250, Fax: (805) 988-8259
jonp@qdt.com
Senior Scientist, Viewlogic Systems
1369 Del Norte Rd.
Camarillo, CA 93010
WEBMASTER: Syed Huq (408) 525-3399, Fax: (408) 526-5504
shuq@cisco.com
Signal Integrity Engineer, Cisco Systems
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134-1706
POSTMASTER: Matthew Flora (425) 869-2320, Fax: (425) 881-1008
mbflora@hyperlynx.com
Senior Engineer, HyperLynx, Inc.
114715 N.E. 95th Street
Redmond, WA 98052
This meeting was conducted in accordance with the EIA Legal Guides and EIA
Manual of Organization and Procedure.
The following e-mail addresses are used:
ibis-request@eda.org
To join, change, or drop from either the IBIS Open Forum Reflector
(ibis@eda.org), the IBIS Users' Group Reflector (ibis-users@eda.org)
or both. State your request.
ibis-info@eda.org
To obtain general information about IBIS, to ask specific questions
for individual response, and to inquire about joining the EIA-IBIS
Open Forum as a full Member.
ibis@eda.org
To send a message to the general IBIS Open Forum Reflector. This
is used mostly for IBIS Standardization business and future IBIS
technical enhancements. Job posting information is not permitted.
ibis-users@eda.org
To send a message to the IBIS Users' Group Reflector. This is
used mostly for IBIS clarification, current modeling issues, and
general user concerns. Job posting information is not permitted.
ibischk-bug@eda.org
To report ibischk2/3 parser bugs. The Bug Report Form Resides on
eda.org in /pub/ibis/bugs/ibischk/bugform.txt along with reported bugs.
To report s2ibis, s2ibis2 and s2iplt bugs, use the Bug Report Forms
which reside under eda.org in /pub/ibis/bugs/s2ibis/bugs2i.txt,
/pub/ibis/bugs/s2ibis2/bugs2i2.txt, & /pub/ibis/bugs/s2iplt/bugsplt.txt
respectively.
Information on IBIS technical contents, IBIS participants, and actual
IBIS models are available on the IBIS Home page found by selecting the
Electronic Information Group under:
Check the pub/ibis directory on eda.org for more information on previous
discussions and results. You can get on via FTP anonymous.
==============================================================================
Received on Mon Aug 23 13:59:39 1999
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jun 03 2011 - 09:52:30 PDT