=============================================================================== IBIS INTERCONNECT TASK GROUP Mailing list: ibis-interconnect@freelists.org ================================================================================ Attendees from August 7, 2024 Meeting (* means attended at least using audio) ANSYS Curtis Clark, Juliano Mologni Broadcom James Church Intel Corp. Michael Mirmak* [Michael Brownell] Xiaoning Ye Keysight Technologies Ming Yan Marvell Steve Parker MathWorks Walter Katz Micron Technology Justin Butterfield Siemens EDA Weston Beal*, Arpad Muranyi*, Randy Wolff* ST Microelectronics Aurora Sanna Synopsys Ted Mido, Edna Moreno University of Illinois Jose Schutt-Aine Zuken USA Lance Wang Michael Mirmak called the meeting to order. No patents were declared. During review of the minutes, Arpad Muranyi moved to approve with corrections to the following two errors: “people would be edit the” and “The meeting adjoured” Weston Beal seconded the motion. The minutes were approved without objection. Michael noted that his earlier ARs were still open regarding contacting industry experts on Touchstone port-mapping improvements. He also renewed his AR to check with Tammy at SAE ITC regarding recordings. Randy Wolff will check as well. Randy noted that the upcoming Summit will indeed be recorded. Michael shared the latest draft port-mapping document. Arpad asked whether the string "C_comp_model_file" is the actual usage. Randy replied that [C Comp Model] is the actual usage (format). Randy noted that the keyword is not in IBIS, but is instead in Touchstone. Arpad noted that the document is not actually pointing to keywords in some cases, but is simply using similar names. Weston noted that the document uses two spaces between sentences. This is a match to the format used in the IBIS document. Michael suggested that the document structure is similar to that used for External Circuit, External Model. Do we need more hierarchy levels in the document to cover the current organization? See Type, Physical, etc. within Port as currently defined. Weston observed that the sub-parameter and parameter concepts are technically swapped. External Circuit is not as good as Circuit Call for an example of the structure. Weston outlined [Circuit Call] and ports. Arpad pointed out that there are no subparameters within Circuit Call, however. Weston suggested that port name usage is similar to a subparameter, involving nodes instead of reserved words. The structure generally resembles the following: Begin Port Map - single use subparameters - Begin ports - multiple stuff - End ports End Port Map Michael asked whether there is a one-port-per-line rule. Is a new keyword needed? He suggested leaving the current structure in-place for now. Arpad asked whether the format needs to be constrained to single lines. Parenthetical structures could be multi-line. Weston replied that Port data ends when Port or End Ports keywords is/are hit. Arpad noted that this is similar to IBIS. Michael asked whether there was any distinction between group and reference. The examples only seem to combine these. Arpad replied that one can group any ports or terminals, and one could have single terminal references. Arpad accepted the AR to provide multiple examples showing reference, ground, etc. separately. [AR] He noted that a major problem is the use of a single reference for all ports in EMD, though he noted that this limitation is undesirable. Randy confirmed this. Arpad noted that an example where this assumption does not apply is where we have a multi-die EMD. A bunch of ports could be located on the die side vs. the other die, etc. Weston replied that Reference is supported here already, so the Touchstone format is actually the superset case. Randy added that the S-element and IBIS-ISS will know what per-port reference to use. Michael suggested that a multiple reference identifier would be possible to support. Weston observed that the whole port map concept is primarily informational. We need an example with a single-pin reference. Arpad replied that three examples come to mind: - a negative terminal for one pin - multiple pins for one reference (still not a group) - one or more pins going to multiple pins, which is a group Randy asked whether C_comp_model file is a filename or a model name? What is it touching? Arpad replied that, here, it's touching a Touchstone file (C_comp model could be ISS or Touchstone). Randy replied that, if that is the case, we need to define some limitations (e.g., 8 ports). Weston added that the parameter should point to the IBIS file, not the Touchstone file. Randy noted that the connection is to the model, not the component. Weston suggested that the format needs to specify both filename and model name. Randy noted that the Interconnect Model name (string) appears in IBIS files. Michael asked whether the objective is to have a general purpose format, with no wrapper assumed. Arpad replied that one cannot have a general purpose EMD file. Weston added that all this port-mapping information is just that; there are no restrictions on re-use of information in other contexts. Michael asked whether these parameters actually cross reference each other between Touchstone and formats like EMD. Randy suggested that the team needs to think about the purpose of the format here. Arpad moved to adjourn the meeting. Randy seconded. The meeting adjourned. The next meeting will be held August 21, 2024. ================================================================================ Bin List: 1) Complete port naming proposal (Katz et al) 2) Complete/revise Touchstone 3.0 draft outline (Mirmak) 3) Complete ISS-IRD 1 Draft - enable cascading of S-parameters through W-element (Mirmak) - TABLED Tabled ARs: - Arpad to give an example of the physical connectivity needed for EMD automation.