Todd, Thanks for your feedback. I apologize for my misunderstanding. I totally agree with your proposal for IBIS_AMI_test. Personally I was planning to build my own standalone test using SystemC (open source language based on C). As the IBIS_AMI_test is now ready I will explore it first. Thanks, On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 17:08, Todd Westerhoff wrote: > Essaid, > > Thanks for your feedback. > > We're not trying to mandate any environment for model development, including > the IBIS_AMI_test > program being turned being over to the IBIS Open Forum. A model developer is > free to write, execute > and debug their models in whatever environment they choose - assuming the > debugger can gain access > to the model as you indicate. > > The thing we're trying to accomplish with IBIS_AMI_test is to provide access > to an independent, > "golden" reference when model or EDA developers interpret the API spec > differently. That golden > reference shouldn't be under the direct control of any individual company, > which is why we think the > code should ultimately be maintained by the IBIS Open Forum. > > >From a purely personal standpoint, I think having a standalone executable > >that loads and executes > models is a good development/debug vehicle - but there are lots of other ways > to approach the > problem. > > As far as licensing IBIS_AMI_test goes, that will be the IBIS Open Forum's > decision. We were simply > suggesting the way the Open Forum licenses IBISCHK as an example that may be > worth following. > Monies from IBISCHK licensing help support different IBIS activities, and > since people don't usually > stand in line to donate money to the EIA, we were simply trying to help where > we could. > > Todd. > > Todd Westerhoff > VP, Software Products > SiSoft > 6 Clock Tower Place, Suite 250 > Maynard, MA 01754 > (978) 461-0449 x24 > twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx > www.sisoft.com > -----Original Message----- > From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Essaid > BENSOUDANE > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 4:17 PM > To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [ibis-macro] DLL debugging and validation > > > Subject: Debugging and validation > > A final product for SERDES modeling using the BIRD should allow the > model developer to debug it's own source code under any platform. It's > not true that the only way to debug the Dll is to have access to source > code that load it. The C compiler allows individual file to be compiled > on various mode (see gcc switches). Therefore you could choose to > generate files symbol tables or not. > > Adding any license fee for an environment to allow debugging is not > acceptable at all. By default debugging capabilities should be included > in the tools. Tools provider should find a solution to be able to hock > gdb to their tools as a client. I already used similar stuff in the past > to integrate processor C-ISS models (as slave) in some EDA tools and I > was able to debug my code without need to have access to EDA tools > source code. > > Having access to both test environment and model for the current > environment is understandable, but it should not be the rule. > > > Functional validation is another issue, where the model developer should > make sure his model much the desired functionalities. In some cases the > model should be validated to reflect an already existing SERDES. It's > the responsibility of the model developer to make sure the DLL he > delivers is validated and conform to ATM specification. > > Best regards, > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- IBIS Macro website : http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/ IBIS Macro reflector: //www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro To unsubscribe send an email: To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: unsubscribe