[ibis-macro] Re: Question on seeting the EMD direction

  • From: "Muranyi, Arpad" <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "IBIS-ATM" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:01:49 -0700

In our recent discussions on Interconnect-SPICE and our last
IBIS-ATM teleconference the question was raised whether we can
safely assume interconnects are LTI.  Scott's message below
(from a different thread) seems to indicate that there are
situations when this may not be the case.  This makes me
nervous about writing a specification that by its definition
would disallow those effects to be simulated...  Any comments?
 
Arpad
===============================================================

________________________________

From: Scott McMorrow [mailto:scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:03 PM
To: Muranyi, Arpad
Cc: twesterh@xxxxxxxxxx; msteinb@xxxxxxxxxx; wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx; 
huangchunxing@xxxxxxxxxx; IBIS-ATM; guantao@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ibis-macro] Re: IBIS-AMI


Arpad

I agree with you, and would add that even the analog network characterization 
portion of a passive interconnect system is not a well understood topic.  
Several issues come to mind:


*       Time variance of the interconnect due to: 

        *       Temperature 
        *       Humidity 
        *       Mechanical Vibration (think twin-ax cables in a vehicle)
                

*       Equalizer training in the presence of crosstalk and noise spikes in a 
hot-plug environment 

But heck, I'd settle for an IBIS-AMI model that correlates with something that 
can actually be measured.

Scott

Scott McMorrow
Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
121 North River Drive
Narragansett, RI 02882
(401) 284-1827 Business
(401) 284-1840 Fax

http://www.teraspeed.com

Teraspeed® is the registered service mark of
Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC


Muranyi, Arpad wrote: 

        Sorry to everyone for arguing a little on what has
        been stated so far.  I tend to disagree with the
        statement(s) that the analog corner modeling is
        a well understood topic.
        
        Just because it is common practice to use high/low
        supply voltages with low/high temperatures, etc...
        to achieve best/worst timings, it doesn't mean that
        this practice actually gives the best/worst timings.
        Having done large amounts of parameter sweeps while I
        was working for my previous employer, I saw solution
        space plots which had failing islands corresponding
        to "in-between" parameter values, and not at the
        extremes.
        
        The answer then was that we do not know where the
        system is failing unless we simulate all possible
        combinations of parameter values.  That's when the
        frequency domain (resonance) analysis, sensitivity
        analysis, design of experiments (DOE) and similar
        techniques became popular.  I tend to believe that
        the application of statistical analysis techniques
        is a natural continuation of this evolution, as
        kind of an attempt to reduce the amount of time it
        takes to go through all possible parameter combinations...
        
        My $ 0.02 worth...
        
        Arpad
        ===========================================================
        
         
        
        -----Original Message-----
        From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
        [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Todd Westerhoff
        Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 1:00 PM
        To: msteinb@xxxxxxxxxx; scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Cc: wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx; huangchunxing@xxxxxxxxxx; 'IBIS-ATM';
        guantao@xxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: IBIS-AMI
        
        It's worth pointing out an IBIS-AMI model actually has two models -
        
        - the analog model in the .ibs file, and
        - the algorithmic model pointed to by the .ibs file
        
        IBIS-AMI analysis separates analysis of a link into two stages - network
        characterization and link
        analysis.  The analog model is used for the former, while the
        algorithmic model is used for the
        latter.  
        
        When we talk about modeling PVT variation, it's worth considering how
        PVT affects each type of model
        separately.  Modeling the effects of PVT on a transmitter's output stage
        or a receiver's input stage
        is well understood (it's what IBIS has been doing for years), while
        modeling the effects of PVT on
        equalization behavior is [relatively] new ground.  I agree this is
        something we should consider
        standardizing, and I also agree that we need more experience in this
        area before it makes sense to
        try & put such standards in place.
        
        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
        
          

Other related posts: