[sv-ac] RE: updated proposal for 3564

Hi Manisha,

Please, see my response to Ben.

Thanks,
Dmitry

-----Original Message-----
From: Kulshrestha, Manisha [mailto:Manisha_Kulshrestha@mentor.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 10:55
To: Korchemny, Dmitry; sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: RE: updated proposal for 3564

Hi Dimitry,

Well, it is correct that it is still a combinational block. But we feel triggering on clock is not the right thing to do. I just checked the examples in 16.15.6.2 Procedural assertion flush points and 16.15.6.3 Procedural concurrent assertions and glitches and the way those examples work, it looks like triggering on clock is wrong. All these examples use const'(..) expressions in concurrent expressions and could have been written as deferred assertions also. But there is no mention that always_comb is going to wake up at every clock to check for the values. And I think that is really not the intention in these examples.

Thanks.
Manisha

-----Original Message-----
From: Korchemny, Dmitry [mailto:dmitry.korchemny@intel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 12:30 PM
To: Kulshrestha, Manisha; sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: RE: updated proposal for 3564

Hi Manisha,

I think that even if the clock is in the sensitivity list, it does not make the always_comb non-combinational block. If the people write a concurrent assertion in an always_comb then they want to check it at each clock there. Simulators may do an optimization, though.

Thanks,
Dmitry

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Kulshrestha, Manisha
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 09:49
To: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] updated proposal for 3564

Hi,

I have updated a new version of 3564 on mantis.

Dimitry, please call a vote on this proposal.

In this updated proposal, I have excluded concurrent assertions from implicitly extracting sensitivities. Although, we agreed to have clk contribute to sensitivity of always_comb, but after discussing it with Anupam, it looks like it is not a good idea as it will make always_comb trigger at every clock and it will no longer remain a combinational block. It will force users to never use a concurrent assertion in always_comb block.

Thanks.
Manisha

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.