RE: [sv-ac] call to vote on 2005

Hi Erik,

Here are a few comments on the latest uploaded version of 2005's proposal. 

  ***

I have a very minor suggestion for wording upgrade, in the new 16.4:

WAS:
However, in order to facilitate glitch avoidance, the reporting or action
blocks are scheduled at a later point in the simulator’s operation, later in the time step.

BETTER:
However, in order to facilitate glitch avoidance, the reporting or action
blocks are scheduled at a later point in the current time step.

Feel free to take it or leave it.

  ***

On another 2005 topic, note that the criteria for flush points includes
event controls and wait statements.  You might want to add an example
of the form

always begin
    ...
    <do something to cause a pending deferred assertion report>
    ...
    wait (sig1);  // Clears deferred assertion report queue
    ...
    wait (sig2);  // Clears deferred assertion report queue (again)
    ...
end

That would clarify that the use of wait() or event-control in a
process body will clear pending deferred assertion reports that
were created earlier in the process' execution.

I'm not exactly clear on the usefulness of this construction,
but it is prescribed by the proposal, and an example would help
make it clear.  Maybe you can think of some more useful example.
I think the real intention for using @ event control to create a
flush point was to make sure top-blocking always blocks result
in a flush each time they are executed.  There are some "implicit
fsm" styles out there that use a number of embedded wait or event
control statements to sequence through the various FSM states.

   ***

Also, in 16.4.4, I see this sentence:

   Disabling a non-outermost scope or a task of a procedure does not cause flushing of any pending reports.

What does "task of a procedure" mean?
A structured procedure is an always block, initial block, or other "process-like" thing.
Those can't contain tasks.  I think this sentence needs to be reworded for clarity.

Regards,
Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of John
Havlicek
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:25 PM
To: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] call to vote on 2005

Hi Folks:

This is the call to vote on the proposal for Mantis 2005, revised
to address comments from Tej Singh.

The document on Mantis is 

   assertdefer080116es.pdf

Please vote if you are eligible.  See details below.

J.H.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Ballot on Mantis 2005

- Called on 2008-01-16, final ballots due by 2008-01-21 T 23:59-08:00.

 v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xx] Doron Bustan
(Intel)
 v[xxxxx--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-x] Eduard Cerny
(Synopsys)     
 n[----------------------x-xxx---------x-x-xxx-x---x] Surrendra Dudani
(Synopsys)
 v[xxxxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xx-xxxxx-xxx-xxx-------] Yaniv Fais
(Freescale)
 t[xxxx--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] John Havlicek
(Freescale - Chair)
 v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx] Dmitry Korchemny
(Intel - Co-Chair)
 v[xxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-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[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx..............................] Johan Martensson
(Jasper)
 n[---------------------------x--x-xx--xx-xxxxxxx-x-] Hillel Miller
(Freescale)
 v[xxxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx] Lisa Piper
(Cadence)
 v[xxxxxx-x-x-xx-xxxxxxx-x-xxxxx-x..................] Erik Seligman
(Intel)
 n[-------x-x----x--------xxxx-----xxxx-xx----------] Tej Singh (Mentor
Graphics)
 v[xxxxxx-x-xxxxxx--xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Bassam Tabbara
(Synopsys)
 v[xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxx...............] Tom Thatcher (Sun
Microsystems)
   |------------------------------------------------- attendance on
2008-01-15
 |--------------------------------------------------- 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.



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