[ibis-macro] Re: The EMD like syntax of package and on-die interconnect models
- From: Scott McMorrow <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Walter Katz <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 17:24:02 -0400
There is a not to subtle difference between supplying models that
accurately represent the part, and supplying models that represent a
conservative model. Supplying a model with a part is an inferred warrantee
that could affect the production yield of a part, so IC Vendors (especially
high volume ones) will be conservative on their models, often specifying
the models using typ/min/max models from a standard as opposed to actual
accurate models.****
*This is a false choice. There is no inferred or implied warranty. A
disclaimer usually is attached to a model. *
** **
"Do you object that our package solution support both detailed aggressor
information as you support and bounded aggressor information?"****
*Your approach is a subset of mine. With my approach you can created a
bounded model. It's very simple. A list of Drivers. A list of Receivers.
A List of Receivers available for crosstalk analysis (which is a subset of
the list of receivers), and a method to indicate those drivers and
receivers that are in proximity to the analyzed receiver. The list of
proximate I/O cells is optional for models encapsulated within a package,
since by definition they are proximate.*
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Scott McMorrow <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Walter
>
> A generic model can specify Drivers, receivers, and proximity to the
> target receiver. If you want I can go through each one of your examples
> and show that it can be done in this way. Or ... do you already have
> models that you are forcing the specification around?
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Walter Katz <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Scott,****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Scott, with all due respect, your approach is most accurate, and I expect
>> you will try to convince IC Vendors to supply the models in your format;
>> our packaging solution must support such models. You should not be
>> surprised that many IC Vendors (and particularly those that have very few
>> letters in their names) will not supply such model in your format, but that
>> they supply models that are either generic to a bus with generic worst case
>> aggressors, or are specific to a pin for the victim through path with
>> generic worst case aggressors; our package solution must support this as
>> well. ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> There is a not to subtle difference between supplying models that
>> accurately represent the part, and supplying models that represent a
>> conservative model. Supplying a model with a part is an inferred warrantee
>> that could affect the production yield of a part, so IC Vendors (especially
>> high volume ones) will be conservative on their models, often specifying
>> the models using typ/min/max models from a standard as opposed to actual
>> accurate models.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Do you object that our package solution support both detailed aggressor
>> information as you support and bounded aggressor information?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Walter****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* Scott McMorrow [mailto:scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 18, 2013 4:22 PM
>>
>> *To:* Walter Katz
>> *Cc:* IBIS-ATM; Randy Wolff
>> *Subject:* Re: [ibis-macro] The EMD like syntax of package and on-die
>> interconnect models****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Walter, with all due respect, all one needs to know are three pieces of
>> information:****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> 1) where are all receivers and drivers****
>>
>> 2) what receiver are we currently measuring****
>>
>> 3) what drivers in near end proximity to the receiver.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> with those three pieces of information, all crosstalk methodologies can
>> be implemented. One does not need special cases to describe each potential
>> methodology.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Scott****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Walter Katz <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:***
>> *
>>
>> Scott,****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> There is more than one way to skin a cat. There are crosstalk
>> methodologies that do not care about victim and aggressors. There are
>> crosstalk methodologies that do care which terminals are victims and
>> aggressors. An IC vendor can and will choose the way they are going to
>> construct and distribute these models. We need to be able to support both
>> methodologies.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> Walter****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> *From:* Scott McMorrow [mailto:scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 18, 2013 2:38 PM
>> *To:* Walter Katz
>> *Cc:* IBIS-ATM; Randy Wolff
>> *Subject:* Re: [ibis-macro] The EMD like syntax of package and on-die
>> interconnect models****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> i disagree with victim aggressor constructs. All that needs to be known
>> is the location of the drivers and receivers, and grouping of such for a
>> general solution.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Walter Katz <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:***
>> *
>>
>> All,****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> I am enclosing a presentation which demonstrates the simple language used
>> to describe both the package and on-die interconnect models using the EMD
>> like methodology applied to all of the types of models that IC Vendors are
>> requesting to deliver.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> Walter****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> Walter Katz****
>>
>> wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx****
>>
>> Phone 303.449-2308****
>>
>> Mobile 303.335-6156****
>>
>> ****
>>
>>
>>
>> ****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> --
>>
>> Scott McMorrow
>> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
>> 16 Stormy Brook Rd
>> Falmouth, ME 04105
>>
>> (401) 284-1827 Business
>>
>> http://www.teraspeed.com
>>
>> Teraspeed® is the registered service mark of
>> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC****
>>
>>
>>
>> ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> --
>>
>> Scott McMorrow
>> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
>> 16 Stormy Brook Rd
>> Falmouth, ME 04105
>>
>> (401) 284-1827 Business
>>
>> http://www.teraspeed.com
>>
>> Teraspeed® is the registered service mark of
>> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
>>
>> ****
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Scott McMorrow
> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
> 16 Stormy Brook Rd
> Falmouth, ME 04105
>
> (401) 284-1827 Business
>
> http://www.teraspeed.com
>
> Teraspeed® is the registered service mark of
> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
>
>
>
--
Scott McMorrow
Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
16 Stormy Brook Rd
Falmouth, ME 04105
(401) 284-1827 Business
http://www.teraspeed.com
Teraspeed® is the registered service mark of
Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC
Other related posts:
