RE: [sv-ac] 1648 - default disable iff

Hi,

 

With the change in the name of default disable, I would like the title
of 16.15 to reflect that change i.e. change the title to 'Default
disable iff resolution'.

 

I do not think that section 22.8 has any information about how default
disable iff should be resolved. It only deals with variable, task,
function, named block and generate blocks. So, how do we treat default
disable iff : like a variable declaration or a task declaration ? I
think it is better to have scoping information in this section itself as
default disable iff does not behave like any of the above.

 

There is another statement "It provides a default disable condition to
all concurrent assertions in the scope of the default disable iff
declaration,

in accordance with the scope rules of 22.8.". I am not sure which
scoping rules are we referring to from 22.8 ?

 

In the proposal it says: "Declaring more than one default disable iff
item within the same module, interface, or program shall be an error." .
This statement does not fit with the new scheme of allowing default
disable iff in generate blocks. Because effectively there may be
multiple declarations inside same module but they may be in generate
block in the module. 

 

I think referring to module, interface and program everywhere in this
paragraph is not right as default disable iff can be inside generates
also. 

 

 

Thanks.

Manisha

From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
Behalf Of Lisa Piper
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:51 AM
To: john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@server.eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] 1648 - default disable iff

 

The change was pretty simple as it turns out.

 

A default disable iff may be declared as an item within a module,
interface, or program. It provides a default disable condition to all
concurrent assertions in the scope of the default disable iff
declaration, in accordance with the scope rules of 22.8.

 

I made one other change.  The label and section number for 16.48 was
wrong.  It was a duplicate of the previous.

 

I did not make any other changes. I have uploaded it to Mantis.

 

Lisa

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of John
Havlicek
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 9:22 PM
To: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] notes from SV-AC meeting 2007-11-13

 

Hi Folks:

 

My notes from today's meeting are attached.

 

Please let me know if changes are required.

 

J.H.

 

-- 

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 <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean. 


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