[ibis-macro] IBIS-ATM teleconference - Agenda for 12/2/2008
- From: "Muranyi, Arpad" <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "IBIS-ATM" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 09:05:10 -0800
Time: December 2, 2008 Noon PDST
=====
Audio:
======
Voice dial-in: (800) 637-5822
International: +1 (647) 723-3937 <--- (For Canada)
0201400572 <--- (For Sweden)
Access Code: 685-0440
Web
===
Click Here to Join Live Meeting:
http://tinyurl.com/yvmesj
or:
https://www.livemeeting.com/cc/sisoft/join?id=NKQQN3&role=attend&pw=TP8j
%23-%25%7E5
Mentor Global Crossing Teleconference commands:
http://www.globalcrossing.com/customer/collaboration/cust_ready_access_t
ips.aspx
FIRST TIME USERS: To save time before the meeting, check your
system to make sure it is compatible with Microsoft Office Live
Meeting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Agenda
======
1) Opens
2) Call for any related patent disclosures
3) Review of ARs:
To All: People should bring their lists of things that need to
be solved in an overhauled new IBIS specification
Michael M.: - Send proposal document to Mike LaBonte for posting;
- Confirm with Synopsys whether "used by permission"
can be used as the official indicator on relevant
documents.
- in progress
Old ARs:
- Arpad: Write parameter passing syntax proposal (BIRD draft)
for *-AMS models in IBIS that is consistent with the
parameter passing syntax of the AMI models
- not done
- TBD: Propose a parameter passing syntax for the SPICE
[External ...] also?
- Arpad: Review the documentation (annotation) in the macro libraries.
- deferred until a demand arises or we have nothing else to do
4) Synopsys update (Todd/Mike)
5) Brain storming session on what the majorly overhauled IBIS
specification should look like. Some questions we need to
answer (in no particular order):
- Who will/should be the target audience for the new IBIS?
- bleeding edge technologies (SERDES, etc...)?
- not so bleeding edge technology (DDR, PCI, etc...)?
- conventional, lower speed technology?
- Should the new IBIS specification strive to solve a solution
that can replace ALL simulation needs (SPICE) for system
designers (except for transistor based models), or provide
only a simpler, and possibly partial solution (at the expense
of "accuracy" vs. "speed")?
- Should the new IBIS spec have the capability to describe
interconnects, boards, i.e. act as a general purpose
netlisting language, or should it be only a buffer modeling
language?
- Do we want to stay with the table based syntax or allow
(heavy duty) equations, transfer functions, and all the
"good stuff"?
- Should the new IBIS spec attempt to be a fix for all missing
(behavioral) capabilities in SPICE and the *-AMS world?
- If the new IBIS specification requires EDA vendors to implement
a new IBIS engine to make use of it, which will be easier
to implement: the new IBIS, or an existing *-AMS language?
(Remember, Verilog-A {analog only} is already gaining popularity
in multiple EDA offerings).
- Should the language be built on predefined keywords which have
assumed functionality (simpler) or be a truly free modeling
language which allows the model maker to define their own
functions (equivalent of keywords) and have total freedom?
- Arpad's views: We should provide a modeling language that
allows the model maker to use it any whichever way they
wish/need to. This DOES NOT imply unnecessary complexity!
For example, just as using a programming language one can
write simple programs, such as "Hello world!" as well as a
super complicated simulator of any sort, the *-AMS languages
can also be used as if they were SPICE, or even IBIS. It
can be achieved with appropriate libraries, functions which
can be written once (even commercially) and then leave the
rest to the user.
- Question: Should we re-invent the wheel and write a spec
that may end up looking very much like *-AMS? The problem
is that the *-AMS languages are not perfect, there could be
a lot done to improve them and to make them easier to use
(catch up with the .net mentality, object oriented, etc...
stuff). If we developed our own new IBIS specification, we
could incorporate some of their style and features and add
things we feel is missing, but do we want to start all that
from scratch (big job)?
- etc...
Thanks,
Arpad
=====================================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Other related posts:
