Wei-hsing,
On Slide 12:
* Start training:
* Iteration between TX and RX either
* Developer decides this should happen in RX's AMI_Initor AMI_GetWave
* TX can train RX or vice versa right here
* They are "dancing" together, only themselves need know who is
leading.
* It's the 2nd instance TX which RX is training or being trained.
How does the 2nd instance TX AMI_Init know that it is the second instance?
Walter
Walter Katz
<mailto:wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx> wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx
Office 978.461-0449 x 133
Mobile 720.417-3762
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On
Behalf Of michael.huang@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, November 1, 2019 2:28 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Proxy based back-channel flow & Code signing AMI model
Hi,
Earlier this week at the ATM WG meeting, I proposed an alternative
back-channel flow and was given an AR to document it for review or further
discussion.
You may find it in the slides linked below:
<http://www.spisim.com/support/ticket/IBISATM/SPISim_BackChanFlow_Proxy.pdf>
http://www.spisim.com/support/ticket/IBISATM/SPISim_BackChanFlow_Proxy.pdf
I intended to keep it updated (at this link) based on your comments until
it's been reviewed or even later.
Meanwhile, I have also written a blog post recently regarding digital
signing AMI model etc. (another topic of discussion at the ATM WG earlier
this year).
If interested, you may find it at the linked below:
<http://www.spisim.com/blog/ibis-ami-secure-the-ami-model-and-software-with-
code-signing/>
http://www.spisim.com/blog/ibis-ami-secure-the-ami-model-and-software-with-c
ode-signing/
Thanks.
Wei-hsing "Michael" Huang
SPISim
EDA in Signal, Power Integrity and Simulation