TWiki
>
P1800 Web
>
SystemVerilogAssertionCommittee
>
SVACMeetingMinutes
>
SV-ACMinutes2010_12_07
(2010-12-17,
ErikSeligman
)
(raw view)
E
dit
A
ttach
Minutes from SV-AC Meeting Date: 2010-12-07 Time: 16:30 UTC (8:30 PST) Duration: 1.5 hours Dial-in information: -------------------- Meeting ID: 38198 Phone Number(s): 1-888-813-5316 Toll Free within North America Live Meeting: [[https://webjoin.intel.com/?passcode=3901343]] Agenda: ------- - Reminder of IEEE patent policy. See: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt - Minutes approval - Chair and co-chair election - Email ballot results - New issues - Issue resolution/discussion Addressing champions' feedback. 2387: Layout of 16.11 is inconsistent Erik to make proposals consistent. 2557: Rules for passing automatic variables to sequence subroutines are not clear Erik to modify the proposal and to remove the reference. 2804: Need to clarify rule (b) in 16.15.6 to allow inferred clock when expression appears in procedural assertion 2934: Precedence and associativity of case operator is not shown in the table 3113: Add port_identifier to constant_primary BNF for sequences, properties and checkers 2476: Need clarification about system functions $onehot, etc - Enhancement progress update 3034: Allow continuous and blocking assignments in checkers Arguments for system functions 3213: Update definition of sampled value - Opens Attendance Record: ------------------ Legend: x = attended - = missed r = represented . = not yet a member v = valid voter (2 out of last 3 or 3/4 overall) n = not a valid voter t = chair eligible to vote only to make or break a tie Attendance re-initialized on 2010-07-06: v[-xxxxxxxxx-x-xxxxx--xxx] Laurence Bisht (Intel) v[xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx-] Eduard Cerny (Synopsys) v[-x-xxxxxxx-xxxxx-xxxxxx] Ben Cohen n[----xx-x-xxx-x--xxxxxxx] Surrendra Dudani (Synopsys) n[x-x--xx---xxxx---x-xxxx] Dana Fisman (Synopsys) v[--xxxxx-xxxx-x-xxxxxxxx] John Havlicek (Freescale) v[xxxxxx-xxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx] Tapan Kapoor (Cadence) t[xxxxxx--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Dmitry Korchemny (Intel ¿ Chair) v[xxxxxx--xxxxxx-xxxxxxxx] Scott Little (Freescale) v[xxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxx] Manisha Kulshrestha (Mentor Graphics) v[xxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Anupam Prabhakar (Mentor Graphics) v[-xx-xxx-xx--xxxxxxx-xxx] Erik Seligman (Intel) v[x-xxxx--xxxxxx-xxxxxxx.] Samik Sengupta (Synopsys) v[xxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx] Tom Thatcher (Oracle ¿ Co-Chair) n[-x.....................] Srini Venkataramanan (?) |- attendance on 2010-11-23 |--- voting eligibility on 2010-11-30 - Reminder of IEEE patent policy. See: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Participants were reminded. - Minutes approval Scott: Mode to approve minutes Tapan: Second Vote results: 8y, 0n, 0a - Chair and Co-chair election Ed: Nominates Dmitry to continue as Chair Samik: Second Vote results: 8y, 0n, 0a Scott: Nominates Tom to continue as co-chair Samik: Second Vote results: 8y, 0n, 0a - Issue resolution/discussion Addressing champions' feedback. Skip over some issues since Erik is sick today 2934: Precedence and associativity of case operator is not shown in the table Tom: Move to approve new proposal for 2934 Scott: Second Vote results: 8y, 0n, 0a - Enhancement progress update 3034: Allow continuous and blocking assignments in checkers Manisha: Original Proposal: Update free vars in reactive region. Also update blocking assignments & continuous assignments in Reactive. Solve in Observed region, but update free vars in Reactive. But assume and assert referencing both a free var and a design variable would give different results. Likes the way Tom had summarized Scott's proposal. Ed: What if we decoupled concurrent assumes and deferred assume statement. Make them separate Manisha: Currently only concurrent assumes participate in the solving for free variables, correct? Dmitry: No mention that only concurrent assertions participate in solving. Manisha: No specific mention of concurrent assertions only, but language referrs to clocking events, pointing to concurrent assertions. Tom: Specifically allowing concurrent assumes would only complicate things. Dmitry: But might be useful, when you have no clock. Scott: May give some ordering of solving. Ed: We didn't define when deferred assertions would be solved. Ed: If you separate domains so that concurrent assertion and deferred assertion can't reference the same free var, then it may not matter. Scott: Makes sense to have continuous assignment occur in Reactive region using current values. Free variables: no real place to solve for them Possibilities: Solve in the next simulation tick. Maybe user specifies an event for solving. Tom: Minimalist proposal: Feel that continuous assignments in checker need to be update in Reactive region. The only problem with this is when the assignment references a free variable. We could just dis-allow this. The user could use a "let" construct instead and it would work. Dmitry: Free variables are very important. Don't want a solutions which doesn't take them into account. Scott: Very counter-intuitive to use sampled values for continuous assigns Scott: Dmitry's example: sanity assertions would not pass. Dmitry: Example would pass, according to the rules in proposal Scott: Rules are starting to get complicated Further discussion on continuous assignments within checkers. Meeting adjourned.
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r1
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
Ra
w
edit
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r1 - 2010-12-17 - 22:22:24 -
ErikSeligman
P1800
Log In
or
Register
P1800 Web
Create New Topic
Index
Search
Changes
Notifications
Statistics
Preferences
Webs
Main
P1076
Ballots
LCS2016_080
P10761
P1647
P16661
P1685
P1734
P1735
P1778
P1800
P1801
Sandbox
TWiki
VIP
VerilogAMS
Copyright © 2008-2026 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki?
Send feedback