1
0
0
1
2
0
x Charles Dawson
x Chuck Berking
x Francoise Martinolle
x Abigail Moorhouse
x Michael Rohleder
x Ying-Tsai Chang
x Bassam Tabbara
x Ghassan Khoory
x Steve Dovich
- Chas and Steve explained why we are going thru the requirements gathering.
- No other meetings to report on.
5. Consent Agenda
6. Expedited Agenda Items
7. New business
Discuss issues that should be included in the next PAR
Francoise asked to hear from users, specifically Michael. Michael said he was gathering
input from within his company. Some ideas included class based interface. He also thought
we should work on VCD dumping for new SystemVerilog constructs. Francoise wanted to
know more about what he meant about class based interface. Francoise thought we would
need to better define the requirement and the use model. Would be a better interface to
system C. Michael took an action to write up a brief description of what he meant by a
class based interface. Maybe bring back the database read API?
Francoise commented that the get/put data routines cannot handle all of the SystemVerilog
constructs. This should be expanded.
Steve thought this was a broader issue. There are other places that have not been updated
such as the encryption algorithm. Model for accessing encrypted code was last updated to
handle 1364-2001. Need to update.
Francoise pointed out that Checkers also has not gotten a good VPI extension. Chuck
thought that 37.67 needs to be reviewed for correctness, and assignment patterns too.
Francoise went through Mantis. There are over 100 unaddressed Items that need to
be looked at.
Francoise suggested that we try to do a survey. Maybe we could do it during DVCon
or create a web site where people could add ideas. Chuck is concerned that the average
user is not aware of what we did in 2009 yet, so they are not in a position to comment
effectively.
Enhancing VPI for covergroups and functional coverage. Francoise asked if that was
covered already. Bassam does not think so. If that is the case, then this is a big hole.
Ying-Tsai comment that he is gathing input from his company too. The data read
API is interesting to him.
Motion to adjourn: Chuck/Michael. Meeting ended at 12:53 pm.
8. Reviewed items with proposals
9. Reviewed SV-CC items with proposals (Straw poll only)