Meeting59Minutes < P1647

P1647 Web>MeetingS>Meeting59Minutes (2010-02-08, BrettLammers) (raw view)EditAttach
<p align="center" style="padding-left: 30px;"> *Meeting 59* *Minutes* </p>

Teleconference, Monday, February 8, 2010, 1700 UTC; 9:00 am Pacific Daylight Time

_A quorum of 8_ _out of 9 voting members present. 6 non-voting members were also present. <br />Attendance and voter status indicated on the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eda.org/twiki/pub/P1647/WebHome/ieee1647_online_roster.xls">on-line roster</a>._

*Attendees*
   * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Voting members</span></p>
      * Brett Lammers
      * Darren Galpin
      * Yaron Kashai
      * Joe Hupcey
      * Michael T McNamara
      * Matan Vax
      * Serrie Chapman
      * Henry Von Bank
   * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Non-voting members</span></p>
      * Tucker Brown
      * Iraklis Diamantidis
      * Amy Witherow
      * JL Gray
      * Kishore Karnane
      * Mike Bartely

*1. Call to order meeting 59 on February 8 at 9:02 am PDT (17:02 UTC)*

*2. Approval of December 14 meeting 58 minutes*
   * <p>Solicit motion to approve the meeting 58 minutes</p>
   * Mike B. motions to approve meeting 58 minutes
   * Serrie C. seconded
   * Meeting 58 Minutes approved

*3. Status update*
   * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"> *Action Items* </span></p>
      * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">1 Dec 08 Joe H.</span> - will identify a driver customer for each language addition on the table and ask them to join the <strong><em>e</em></strong>WG and contribute both labor and, if necessary, funding. - Pending</p>
         * *February 8 Update* 
            * no new progress to report
         * *December 14 Update* 
            * Identified several customers that are active with the Real Number capability (India, Europe, and US)
            * Next step to contact local AE's for these customers. Will be following up first thing in the new year
         * *November 9 Update:* 
            * Darren did contact a colleague, Pim Palmen, who is willing to get involved. Contact details sent to Matan
            * Joe did follow up with some internal Cadence contacts who provided some customers that Joe is going to start following up on
         * *Oct 12 Update:* 
            * Joe has not made any progress on identifying customer drivers
            * Joe to provide a report on reflector upon contacting list of individuals
         * *Sept 14 Update*: 
            * Joe: Was able to set aside some real focused time and was able to find contacts for each feature
            * Joe: Next step is start contacting the people found directly or through appropriate AEs
            * Joe: Interesting note that the decision to set aside the "temporal coverage" feature seemed to track as no issues found in the support database related to that feature
            * Andy: Missing results on temporal coverage not surprising. Intel using in house solution.
            * Andy: Might be worth double checking with Ziv and/or Intel on the "temporal coverage" feature.
            * Matan: Had a short chat on temporal coverage with Shlomi (Specman R&D) who seemed to be in favor of the feature
            * Andy: Appreciate Shlomi's input. However, need to identify customers to drive this feature.
            * Darren: One difference for temporal coverage is that it is a fresh development and therefore requires more work
            * Andy: That is correct
         * <p> *Aug 10 Update*: <br />Joe - Very limited progress. Database can be searched but it is difficult to really develop a pattern and draw conclusions. Will attempt again when back from vacation<br />Joe - Another tack might be to contact members that have been past members but have dropped out attendance wise. Will follow up after roster has been updated <br />Darren - The on-line roster has been updated to better reflect active or interested members<br />Andy - Have we thought about a blanket email to all AE's?<br />Joe - Yes that is a thought. Waiting until after the vacation "season" ends.</p>
         * <p> *13 July:* Little progress to date, and it is rather challenging as it isn't easy to extract the info - it will take more time. Is there a list on-line of those who used to participate? If there is, we need to look at it and purge it - we need to look at the roster and purge it of those who are not interested, as some are not doing verification any more.<br />Darren: I'll check the roster against the mailing list.<br />Brett: Perhaps check why some people took themselves off the list? [Note: two did, Carl Walker from Cisco, and Alan Ahlschlager from Cadence].<br />Serrie: Perhaps only check against people who have ever attended a meeting?<br />Brett: Agreed<br />Joe H: Agreed<br />Darren: The problem is that I do not have that information, as only the results of the past four meeting was kept for voting privileges.<br />Joe H: Perhaps Andy has the information?</p>
         * <p> *6 June:* No progress to date.</p>
         * <p> *11 May:* Brett and Joe now have access to the support database so they can search for relevant customers for each features. They will be working with their AEs on this. Brett has not yet figured how to extract the needed information but it will be labor intensive.</p>
         * <p> *13 Apr:* Joe asked Alan Ahlschlager if he and Brett Lammers can access the support database.</p>
         * <p> *6 Mar:* Joe is coordinating this with CDNS Support, correlating enhancement requests with P1647-2010 features. Expected to be a somewhat slow process as service requests are not currently categorized by language construct.</p>
   * <p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Task Forces</span></strong></p>
      * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Constraints (lead: Mark Strickland)</span></p>
         * <p>Named checks</p>
         * <p>Named constraints</p>
         * <p>Type constraints</p>
         * <p> *February 8 Update* </p>
            * <p>Darren: Mark did review and close a number of Manits issues</p>
         * <p> *Dec 14 Update* </p>
            * No Update from Mark
            * Waiting for Mark to review the updates that Darren posted
         * <p> *Nov 9 Update* </p>
            * <p>Darren did go through what was submitted and released a newly updated draft.</p>
            * <p>Mark needs to review updates and close any issues as appropriate</p>
         * <p> *Oct 12 Update* - No update</p>
         * *Sept 14 Update* - No update
         * <p> *Aug 10 Update* - No update</p>
         * <p> _*Previous Status* - <br />Two documents have been reviewed and issues submitted into the bug tracking system for the first document. Mike has sent some issues via e-mail, and they need to be entered.<br />Mike: Do you want me to enter them?<br />Mark: Enter them - we can discuss them afterward_ </p>
      * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Macros (lead: Matan Vax)</span></p>
         * <p>Define-as-computed</p>
         * *February 8 Update* 
            * Finished merged doc. Out for review (Look up mantis issue to find uploaded Doc)
         * *Dec 14 Update -*
         * 
            * Midway through merging donated document
            * Looking to have first draft by the end of the week
            * Will post doc for further review
         * *Nov 9 Update -* 
            * No real progress to report
         * *Oct 12 Update -* 
            * <span style="text-decoration: underline;">(Post meeting email update from Matan as Matan was not at the meeting)</span>
            * Matan: I do have updates on my AIs from last meeting, but I haven't managed to feed them into the wiki yet. I'll try to do that next.
         * *Sept 14 Update* - 
            * Matan: Was able to do a read through of what was donated as well as the existing material. Need to do some significant merging.
         * *Aug 10 Update* - No Update
         * <p> _*Previous Status* <br />No real progress<br />Anticipating assistance of Cristian Amitroaie_ </p>
      * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Ports (lead: Yaron Kashai)</span></p>
         * <p>Interface ports</p>
         * <p>TLM ports as in <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.eda.org/twiki/bin/edit.cgi/P1647/SystemC?topicparent=P1647.Meeting56Minutes" title="SystemC (this topic does not yet exist; you can create it)">SystemC</a></p>
         * *February 8 Update* 
            * no update
            * Still need to contact users
         * *Dec 14 Update -* 
            * First draft is on the wikki
            * Next steps to find users or potential users- Brett has suggested some and will followup in Jan
         * *Nov 9 Update -* 
            * Yaron and Brett discussed most of the issues and resolved/agreed on most of them
            * Yaron got an update from Specman <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.eda.org/twiki/bin/edit.cgi/P1647/RnD?topicparent=P1647.Meeting57Minutes" title="RnD (this topic does not yet exist; you can create it)">RnD</a> on multiple port connections and other topics
            * Ready to update doc with review agreement between Brett and Yaron
         * *Oct 12 Update -* 
            * Material posted on wiki
            * Some reviews in, good comments and fixes needed
            * Looking for up-to-date material, current material is not whole story.
            * Yaron is trying to find out what that's about
            * Overall not very far from wrapping this up
         * *Sept 14 Update -* 
            * Yaron: First Draft is posted on the Wiki. Mostly done but does need some further review and fine tuning
            * Brett: I did a quick review and need to post/send my comments for Yaron
         * *Aug 10 Update* - No real progress 
            * No real customer interest
            * Relatively easy feature that should be straightforward to include in the LRM
            * Yaron's Proposal: add page to Wiki in which working drafts can be posted and reviewed
            * Darren - Seems reasonable. You (Yaron) should have access to do so
            * Yaron - Will make a top level "Work in Progress" link containing the various drafts that are in progress
         * <p><em><strong>Previous Status</strong><br />Read through the document<br />Will post the text on the Wiki</em></p>
      * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Types (lead: Mike Bartley)</span></p>
         * <p>Parameterized types</p>
         * <p>Real data type</p>
         * *February 8 Update* 
            * Review of general doc done
            * Looking at 2 additions sent last week 
               * Seem to be very tool oriented right now. Need to be turned into more User oriented docs
               * Matan: We should not capture tool limitations in the doc. Need to focus on semantic rules 
                  * May want to specify limitations based on use cases (i.e. rule out some semantics for real type constraints)
            * Still need to address 2 mantis issues (2874 and 2881) 
               * Matan will do more investigation
         * *Dec 14 Update -* 
            * No update from Mike
            * Still waiting for missing docs mentioned below
            * Matan is going to follow-up on this again
            * Matan to follow up Mike's questions (email Nov 2) regarding issues 2881 and 2874
         * <p> *Nov 9 Update -* </p>
            * <p>Darren made updates to the doc. Mike needs to go through and close issue</p>
            * <p>Some documentation missing from Cadence (only part of current docs was donated by Cadence)</p>
               * <p>Need to have docs on how real types effect other areas (Constraint solving etc)</p>
               * <p>Joe or Matan need to follow-up with Amy (Cadence docs) to deliver more sections</p>
               * <p>Missing sections in current delivery:17.6 and 17.7 Real number generation and Real number coverage.</p>
   * 
      * 
         * <p> *Oct 12 Update -* </p>
            * <p>Not much to report, all current documents are in place</p>
         * *Sept 14 Update* - 
            * Darren for Mike: All issues have been posted in the issues tracker
         * *Aug 10 Update* - 
            * Have not yet put issues into Mantis.
            * Plan to put working draft of document on Wiki for further comments
            * Henry has responded and has agreed our (Mike and Serrie) comments and has no additional comments. We are now just waiting for one of us to have the time to add the comments into Mantis.
         * <p><em><strong>Previous Status<br /></strong>Mike and Serrie have reviewed the documents, and have e-mailed comments to Henry. To be put into Mantis.</em></p>
      * <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Encryption (lead: Stylianos)</span></p>
         * *February 8 Update* 
            * Iraklis taking over for now.
            * Received docs from Stylianos
            * Unsure if Stylianos will stay as lead or not. Need to hear from Stylianos
         * *Dec 14 Update - No update* 
            * Stylianos has taken a new job at Synopsis. Darren to follow-up to see if Stylianos will still taking on this lead role<strong><br /></strong>
         * *Nov 9 Update - No update*
         * *Nov 9 Update - No update*
         * *Oct 12 Update -* 
            * Still working on recommendations, will post on wiki when something is available
         * *Sept 14 Update -* 
            * Stylianos: Did find some good information in the<strong><em> e</em></strong>RM documentation. Will start working on some "recommendation" documentation that covers what should be encrypted etc
         * <strong>Aug 10 Update </strong>- No Update
         * <strong>Previous Status<br /></strong>Stylianos will tackle elaborating the encryption specification of<strong><em> e</em></strong>.
   * <p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Open issues</span></strong></p>
      * <p>Darren: There are a number of open issues that maybe should be saved for Sept meeting which hopefully will have a better quorum</p>
         * *February 8 Update* 
            * No specific update here except for the discussion under the task force sections above
         * <strong>Dec 14 Update - <br /></strong>
            * No update here except for the discussion under the types task force
         * <p> *Nov 9 Update -* </p>
            * <p>Darren added issue 2903 for shortened when subtype syntax to the issue tracker</p>
               * <p>Matan volunteers to handle this.</p>
               * <p>Darren will assign the issue to Matan</p>
         * <p>Matan has updated some issues below. Darren will follow-up and update the status on those issues as appropriate</p>
         * <p> *Oct 12 Update -* </p>
            * <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=2765">Issue 2765</a> - LRM Sect 1.1: Scope 
               * _PAR matches what is in document._
         * *Sept 14 Update -* 
            * <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=2763">Issue 2763</a> - semicolons as separators 
               * LRM specifically allows "empty clause"
               * Resolution: Close as "no issue"
            * <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=2759">Issue 2759</a> - rf_named_entity, rf_enum, rf_struct, rf_event do not fully list their methods 
               * Resolution: Matan will look into this issue
            * <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=2758">Issue 2758</a> - Addition: dut_errorf() and dut_error() {action block} 
               * Darren:Is there exiting Cadence documentation for DUT_errorf?
               * Darren: There is code out there using these constructs but they are not documented
               * Darren: Probably just an oversight but we do need to capture it.
               * Matan: Did not find in current Specman docs either. Should be easy to capture as it is the same as other string format operations. It is hard to imagine any thing different
               * Darren: Can we confirm there is no difference?
               * Yaron??: Concern about the semantics of the dut_error action (i.e. definition of an action inside an expression)
               * Brett: Isn't this action block the same idea as the message statement with an action?
               * Matan: Yes but message does have some other complications.
               * Darren: The original concern really is that it exists in the language but is not described in the LRM
               * Resolution: Matan and Brett will look into the code to confirm both variants and get back to the group possibly with a proposal on new documentation
            * <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=2765">Issue 2765</a> - LRM Sect 1.1: Scope 
               * Resolution: Andy to compare 2010 PAR to what we currently have and make sure they are identical
            * <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=2833">Issue 2833</a> - no_collect not an item option for transition or cross cover 
               * Matan: Don't have an answer off hand. Probably need to consult coverage team
               * Andy: Don't see why no_collect should not be an option for transition or crosses
               * Resolution: Matan will discuss with Specman coverage team and report back to the group
            * <a target="_blank" href="http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=2789">Issue 2789</a> - Default parameter values for methods 
               * Resolution: Matan still needs to update the issue in the tracker with the discussion from the reflector
               * *Nov 9 update -* Matan did post a document to the Wiki on this subject

*4. Other business*
   * <p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Any other business?</span></strong></p>
      * <p>Mail a message to <a target="_blank" href="mailto:ieee1647@edaNOSPAM.org">ieee1647@edaNOSPAM.org</a> (the general email reflector) if you were not recorded in these minutes</p>
   * <p> *Editor Slot* </p>
      * *February 8 Update* 
         * Should code examples be removed? 
            * Yes examples longer then a small syntactic example should be removed. This was the practice in the previous releases
         * Should references to Specman Docs be removed? 
            * Yes non public references should be removed. This was the practice in the previous releases

*5. Call for essential patents*
   * <p>The IEEE-SA updated the patent policy effective April 2008</p>
   * <p>The details are available in updated slide set at <a target="_blank" href="http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf">http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf</a>. (See "Patent related" from the IEEE 1647 home page, "Slides About IEEE Patent Policy").</p>
   * <p>If you believe that any patent claims are essential patent claims, please inform the working group. Review the posted slides for more information.</p>

*6. Next meeting*
   * <p>March 8th at 9 am PST (1700 UTC)</p>

*7. Adjourn*
   * <p>Yaron motioned</p>
   * <p>Matan seconded</p>
   * <p>Motion approved</p>
   * <p>Meeting adjourned at 9:20 am PDT (17:20 UTC)</p>

-- Main.BrettLammers - 2010-02-08
Topic revision: r2 - 2010-02-08 - 17:46:27 - BrettLammers
P1647