[ibis-macro] Comments on BIRD 150 (Dependency Table)
- From: "Muranyi, Arpad" <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: IBIS-ATM <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:53:22 +0000
Walter,
I am not sure what your plans are with BIRD 150 before we
start discussing it in detail again, but I would like to
make a couple of comments on it now.
The latest version of the BIRD I have shows this syntax:
(Tx_Strength_Dependency (Usage Dependency_Table)
(Type Integer Float Float)
(ParameterNames Tx_Strength Rs Voh)
(ColumnTypes In Out_Match Out_Match)
(Description "Rs and Voh dependency on Tx_Strength")
(Table (0 45.0 0.40)
(1 46.0 0.42)
(2 47.0 0.44)
(3 50.0 0.46)
(4 52.0 0.48)
(5 50.0 0.50)
(6 48.0 0.52)
(7 45.0 0.54)
)
)
If we have a new Usage, namely "Dependency_Table" we could associate
that with a special rule as follows:
No "Type" definition is needed (or allowed) because the list of
"ParameterNames" implies that the types are inherited from the
parameters which are required to exist in the .ami file. This
would eliminate the need to duplicate the types of each parameter
again in the Dependency Table definition, which can be error prone
and wastes space.
Another comment regarding parameters which are used as input to
Dependency Table. What if there is a parameter which is only used
as a control input to Dependency Table and nothing else? What is
it's Usage? The currently available Usages are defining parameters
which either go to the EDA tool, or the AMI Model (DLL) and/or come
back from the AMI Model (DLL). What if a parameter is not used by
the EDA tool nor the DLL? I think we need to invent a new Usage for
that purpose. How about "DT_control" or "DT_input", or similar?
This will only happen with inputs to the Dependency Table, since
its output makes only sense if it goes somewhere, the DLL or the
EDA tool.
More later as we go.
Thanks,
Arpad
=====================================================================
Other related posts:
