Subject: RE: [sv-ac] Minutes of SV-AC Meeting 10/3/02
From: Erich Marschner (erichm@cadence.com)
Date: Fri Oct 04 2002 - 13:32:12 PDT
Tom,
The following quotation from me is incorrect:
EM: We will draw on OVA and PSL as resources. VG will drive the
synchronization between the two, both in functionality and in time. There is
no explicit requirement that the assertion language must be coherent,
consistent and complete, and this will be a serious concern. For example,
there are significant clocking semantic issues that will need to be
addressed.
What I said is this:
"In the last Board meeting, the Accellera Board passed a resolution directing Vassilios to "synchronize" PSL and DAS "to the greatest extent possible". I interpret 'synchronize' to mean that PSL and DAS should be identical wherever possible. I believe that Vassilios may also interpret this as "synchronize in time", but that to me is a secondary issue."
The key point here is that the Accellera Board has required synchronization between PSL and DAS - with no mention of OVA.
Regards,
Erich
-------------------------------------------
Erich Marschner, Cadence Design Systems
Senior Architect, Advanced Verification
Phone: +1 410 750 6995 Email: erichm@cadence.com
Vmail: +1 410 872 4369 Email: erichm@comcast.net
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Tom Fitzpatrick [mailto:fitz@co-design.com]
| Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:32 PM
| To: sv-ac@eda.org
| Subject: [sv-ac] Minutes of SV-AC Meeting 10/3/02
|
|
| Attendance:
|
| Legend:
| x = attended
| - = missed
| r = represented
| . = not yet a member
|
| [xxxxx----x.] Faisal Haque (Cisco, Chairman)
| [xx-xxxxxxrx] Tom Fitzpatrick (Synopsys, Co-Chair)
| [--x-x-x--xr] Tom Anderson (0-in)
| [----------x] Jason Andrews (Axis)
| [xxxx-xxx--x] Roy Armoni (Intel)
| [xx-xxxxxxxx] Gail Dagan (Intel)
| [-x-x--xxxxx] Simon Davidmann (Co-Design)
| [--x-xxxrxx.] Surrendra Dudani (Synopsys)
| [xxxxxxxrxrx] Cindy Eisner (IBM)
| [----xxrrrxx] Peter Flake (Co-Design)
| [x-rx-xxxrrx] Harry Foster (Verplex)
| [xxrxx-xxx..] John Havlicek (Motorola)
| [x-xx-xxxxx-] Richard Ho (0-in)
| [-x.........] Sagi Katz (Gallileo)
| [xxxxxxxxrx-] Adam Krolnik (LSI)
| [xxx-x--xx-x] David Lacey (HP, OVL Chairman)
| [xxxxxx---xx] Joseph Lu (Sun)
| [xxxxx--xxxx] Erich Marschner (Cadence)
| [xxxxx-x-x-x] Steve Meier (Synopsys)
| [----------x] Paul Menchini (Menchini & Associates)
| [-xxxxx-xxxx] Prakash Narain (Real Intent)
| [xxxxxxxxxx-] Rajeev Ranjan (Real Intent)
| [---xxxxxxx.] Ambar Sarkar (Paradigm Works)
| [xxxx-x-x...] Richard Stolzman (Verplex)
| [-x-xxxxxx-x] Andrew Seawright (0-in)
| [xxxx-xrxxxx] Bassam Tabbara (Novas)
| [xxx........] Yaron Wolfsthal (IBM)
| |||||||||||
| ||||||||||+- 7/9/02
| |||||||||+-- 7/25/02
| ||||||||+--- 8/1/02
| |||||||+---- 8/8/02
| ||||||+----- 8/15/02
| |||||+------ 8/22/02
| ||||+------- 9/5/02
| |||+-------- 9/12/02
| ||+--------- 9/19/02
| |+---------- 9/26/02
| +----------- 10/3/02
|
|
| Results of OVA Donation vote:
| Accept: Intel, Motorola, Novas, Real Intent, Sun, Synopsys
| Oppose: Cadence, Verplex, IBM, 0-in
|
| OVA Donation has been accepted.
|
| FH: What items need to be discussed at the next meeting?
| TF: The requirements voting results will be available on Monday.
| FH: Can we make SV-AC a monthly meeting from now on?
| AK: What are the requirements going to be used for?
| FH: The DWG will try to ensure that the LRM meets the requirements.
| EM: This may be in conflict with the specified schedule.
| SM: Let's use the number of votes to prioritize the
| requirements. We should
| work on requirements in this order, and those that can't be
| addressed in
| time to meet the schedule, they should be dropped.
| AK: Unless there is not enough functionality.
| TF: The SV-AC must still approve the work of the DWG.
| SM: If that's the case, then we need to discuss what to do.
| FH: It is likely that we may need to make tradeoff decisions on the
| lower-priority requirements.
| EM: We will draw on OVA and PSL as resources. VG will drive the
| synchronization between the two, both in functionality and
| in time. There is
| no explicit requirement that the assertion language must be coherent,
| consistent and complete, and this will be a serious concern.
| For example,
| there are significant clocking semantic issues that will need to be
| addressed.
| FH: We will note this concern and address it.
| EM: This is the next topic in the DWG. We will see if there
| is a resolution
| possible on clocking semantics.
| JH: I have not yet seen the formal definition of OVA as part of the
| donation. Those semantics must be provided in order to make progress.
| SM: These will be available at the end of the week.
| AK: Will the problem with false-firings in 3.0 be addressed?
| TF: The current voting indicates that this will be an
| important requirement.
|
| FH: Propose that we meet next month (11/7) to discuss
| requirements and
| review DWG progress.
| TF: I'll be on vacation. Can we make it 10/31?
|
| Next meeting: Thursday, October 31, 2002.
| 9-11am PST
| Call-in information to be provided prior to the meeting.
|
| Thanks,
| -Tom
|
| ------------------------------------------------------
| Tom Fitzpatrick
| Sr. Manager, Product Technical Marketing
| Synopsys, Inc.
| ------------------------------------------------------
| Email: fitz@synopsys.com Mobile: (978)337-7641
| Tel: (978)448-8797 Fax: (561)594-3946
| ------------------------------------------------------
|
|
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Oct 04 2002 - 13:33:55 PDT