[sv-ac] Minutes of SV-AC Meeting 4/5/2011

Minutes of SV-AC Meeting
Date: 2011-04-05
Time: 16:00 UTC (9:00 PDT)
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=8799833

Agenda:
-------
- Reminder of IEEE patent policy.
See: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt

- Minutes approval

- Email ballot results

- New issues
3474: Extend assertion control to apply to 'violation reports' for
unique/priority case

- Issue resolution/discussion

- Enhancement progress update
3295: need a way to control only asserts/covers/assume directives
3069: Relax rules for $global_clock resolution
3213: Update definition of sampled value
3195: Local Variables Flow Out Issue in and/or/intersect/implies

- Mantis status

- 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[xx-xxx-xxx...........................] Ashok Bhatt (Cadence)
   v[xxxxxxxxxx-xxx-xxxxxxxxx-x-xxxxx--xxx] Laurence Bisht (Intel)
   v[xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx-] Eduard Cerny (Synopsys)
   n[-----xx---xxx--x-xxxxxxx-xxxxx-xxxxxx] Ben Cohen
   n[------------------xx-x-xxx-x--xxxxxxx] Surrendra Dudani (Synopsys)
   v[xxxx-x-x----x-x-x--xx---xxxx---x-xxxx] Dana Fisman (Synopsys)
   n[----------------xxxxx-xxxx-x-xxxxxxxx] John Havlicek (Freescale)
   v[xxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx] Tapan Kapoor (Cadence)
   v[xxx-x-x..............................] Jacob Katz (Intel)
   t[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Dmitry Korchemny (Intel ¿ Chair)
   v[xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx--xxxxxx-xxxxxxxx] Scott Little (Freescale)
   v[x-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxx] Manisha Kulshrestha (Mentor
Graphics)
   v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Anupam Prabhakar (Mentor
Graphics)
   v[xxx-xxx-xxx--x-xx-xxx-xx--xxxxxxx-xxx] Erik Seligman (Intel)
   v[xxxx-x-xxx-xxxx-xxxx--xxxxxx-xxxxxxx.] Samik Sengupta (Synopsys)
   v[x-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx] Tom Thatcher (Oracle ¿ Co-Chair)
   n[-xx---xx-------x.....................] Srini Venkataramanan (CVC
Pvt Ltd)
     |- attendance on 2011-04-05
   |--- voting eligibility on 2011-04-05

Minutes:
--------

- Reminder of IEEE patent policy.
See: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt

Participants were reminded of the IEEE patent policy

- Minutes approval
Tom: I didn't attend, but Dmitry marked me as present.

Erik: Move to approve , with correction to Tom's attendance.
Scott Second
        Vote results; 11y, 0n, 0a

(Mannisha joined)

- New issues

3474: Extend assertion control to apply to 'violation reports' for
        unique/priority case
Erik: Unique or priority case statement: Called a violation report,
        assertion control statements won't apply to these.
        Maybe treat these messages as a different type of assertion.
Tom: Is it just as simple as adding new assertion types?
Erik: It may be more complicated than that.

- Enhancement progress update
3213: Update definition of sampled value
        Reviewers have mainly made editorial comments. Will leave open
        for comments.
        Possibly set an e-mail ballot next week.

3295: need a way to control only asserts/covers/assume directives
Manisha: Added new set of control types for controlling the action.
        Now we have pass-on, fail-on pass-off fail-off
        Changed example: using let in the example.
Dmitry: Will call for an e-mail vote

3069: Relax rules for $global_clock resolution
Jacob: Feeback last time was to add more examples.
        This proposal is not backward-compatible.
Dmitry: Effect of backward-incompatibility would be a compilation error.
        Less dangerous than different behavior.
Ashok: Introduce a new function and deprecate global clocking?
Tom: Especially since the "global" clock is no longer global.
Dmitry: That would introduce too many changes to LRM.
Jacob: Will keep current proposal and add a note to proposal highlighting
        the incompatibility.
Anupam: Lots of people use global clocking.

Jacob: will remove statement prohibiting a global clocking statement inside
        a program block.
Dmitry: Check whether BNF needs to change as well.
        Ed and Manisha will review again.
        Will call for an e-mail ballot next time.
        
3195: Local Variables Flow Out Issue in and/or/intersect/implies
Dmitry: Ben was the champion for this item, but he currently can't
        participate.
        Table discussion for now.

- Mantis status
Dmitry: Had sent out a spreadsheet, and was asking for feedback on it.

- Opens:
Manisha: Checker binding:
        LRM allows a checker to be bound into a module.
        This works as if module is instantiated.
        However, with checker re-writing algorithm, acts as if
        module is inlined.
        Seems to be a conflict.

        Difficult to compile: Target module may be already compiled,
        it's not possible to inline the
        A lot more information has to be processed when checker is
        bound.

        Binding Checker to instance is even more complicated.

Dmitry: Can we think of restrictions that would make this possible.
Manisha: Difficulties:
        Inferring clocks for unclocked sequences.
Anupam: Also, removing sampling of
Jacob: Also new definition of global clock will be a problem
Binding Checker to instance is even more complicated.

Dmitry: Can we think of restrictions that would make this possible.
Manisha: Difficulties:
        Inferring clocks for unclocked sequences.
Anupam: Also, removing sampling of on ports.
Jacob: Also new definition of global clock will be a problem.
Ed: We don't want to prevent separate compilation of the units.
        What about checkers in a package?

Meeting adjourned.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.