RE: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1900

There has already been negative vote but since I've already spend the
time reviewing this :) here are my notes:

General syntax (in the beginning and end of the document)

* The proposal should change module_or_interface_or_generate_item
otherwise the BNF of generate_region,loop_generate_construct can't reach
checker_or_generate_item_declaration (need to put restrictions such that
checker items can only be used in checkers like done for interface vs.
module).

* better to include clocking_declaration in the checker items o.w it
would only be possible to declare the clocking outside and use it by
hierarchical path (if this is possible) since currently only "default
clocking clocking_identifier" is allowed (making all the examples
illegal...)

* adjust default disable to what is approved.

* what about let_declaration (as in 1728) in checker_items?

* checker_instantiation ::=
checker_identifier name_of_instance ([list_of_port_connections]) ;
Whereas list_of_port_connections allows only to pass expression.
 This would disallow passing sequence and property expressions.

* page 8: it is mentioned:
"Variables used in a checker that are neither formal arguments to the
checker nor internal variables of the
checker are resolved according to the scoping rules from the scope in
which the checker is declared."
Don't you mean where the checker is *instantiated* instead of declared ?
o.w how does this apply to all the examples with "property
defined_elsewhere" ? 


* page 22: "While procedural statements (if, case, ...) cannot be placed
directly in checkers .." - where is that said ? Doe's this mean the
following code is illegal ? Why ?
freevar r;
always_check @(posedge clk or negedge rst_b)
  if (!rst_b)
    r <= 1'b0;
  else
    ...


* page 22: "generate if (coverage_level != ovl_cover_none) begin
cover_b" - missing colon after the named block cover_b

* mentioned in example page 9 that you can instantiate a checker inside
a procedural statement, should be in the syntax somewhere
(statement_item)

*general notes:

* if in a checker only always_check and initial_check are allowed and
outside checker those are not allowed then why not simply have always
and initial inside checker ? ,after all we don't have always_interface
or initial_program . I understand there are different context infer
rules but those can be made if you are inside a checker or not.

* page 9 + later:  we were trying to get rid of untyped arguments so I
think it is better to give examples with typed arguments when possible
(or use the untyped keyword)

* having freevar being deterministic is counterintuitive to me, can we
have freevar and regular vars inside checkers where freevar are those
not being assigned (and thus free) ? This is similar to the current
formal verification tools behavior I'm familiar with (where anything
undriven (net or reg) is "x" or "free")



Yaniv

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of John
Havlicek
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 22:06
To: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1900

Hi Folks:

This is the call to vote on the proposal for Mantis 1900.

The document is

   checkers_071104dk.pdf

Please vote if you are eligible.  See the details below.

J.H.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Ballot on Mantis 1900

- Called on 2007-11-06, final ballots due by 2007-11-13 T 23:59-08:00.

 v[xxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xx] Doron Bustan (Intel)
 v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-x] Eduard Cerny (Synopsys)

 n[--------------x-xxx---------x-x-xxx-x---x] Surrendra Dudani
(Synopsys)  v[-xxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xx-xxxxx-xxx-xxx-------] Yaniv Fais
(Freescale)  t[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] John Havlicek
(Freescale - Chair)  v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx] Dmitry
Korchemny (Intel - Co-Chair)
v[xxxxxxx-xxx-x--xx--xxxxx----------xx-xxxx] Manisha Kulshrestha (Mentor
Graphics)  n[----------------------xxxxx-------x-xx-x-] Jiang Long
(Mentor Graphics)  n[-x------------x--xxx.....................] Joseph
Lu (Altera)  v[xxxxxxxxxxx..............................] Johan
Martensson (Jasper)  n[-------------------x--x-xx--xx-xxxxxxx-x-] Hillel
Miller (Freescale)  v[xx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx] Lisa
Piper (Cadence)  n[-x-xx-xxxxxxx-x-xxxxx-x..................] Erik
Seligman (Intel)  n[-x----x--------xxxx-----xxxx-xx----------] Tej Singh
(Mentor Graphics)  v[-xxxxxx--xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Bassam
Tabbara (Synopsys)  v[x-xxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxx...............] Tom
Thatcher (Sun Microsystems)
   |----------------------------------------- attendance on 2007-11-06
 |------------------------------------------- voting eligibility for
this ballot
|-------------------------------------------- email ballots received

        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


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


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