Re: [sv-ac] comment about 1995

Hi Erik:

We should revote.

I will call for the vote later today.

J.H.

> X-ExtLoop1: 1
> X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,239,1199692800"; 
>    d="doc'32?pdf'32?scan'32,32,208";a="507020961"
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 08:10:34 -0800
> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
> X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
> Thread-Topic: [sv-ac] comment about 1995
> thread-index: AchX5QkV5uk7PepLTaafwaVANL34aQEJU/DgAAEu7xAAEA0kUAABHn/wAB0FcpAAELCfgAACLmPQAAcdVFAAFHIl4AAWK2ZQ
> From: "Seligman, Erik" <erik.seligman@intel.com>
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jan 2008 16:10:35.0713 (UTC) FILETIME=[7CBDDB10:01C85DDA]
> 
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> 
> ------_=_NextPart_001_01C85DDA.7C661759
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> 	charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> OK, the new version is attached.
> 
> John-- do we need a revote, or can Manisha just approve her friendly
> amendment?
> Also, in the current Mantis status of 1995, it apparently won't let me
> add any more documents.  How do I upload these?=20
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kulshrestha, Manisha [mailto:Manisha_Kulshrestha@mentor.com]=20
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:50 PM
> To: Seligman, Erik; Korchemny, Dmitry; john.havlicek@freescale.com;
> sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] comment about 1995
> 
> I think that should be fine.
> 
> Thanks.
> Manisha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Seligman, Erik [mailto:erik.seligman@intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 1:20 AM
> To: Kulshrestha, Manisha; Korchemny, Dmitry;
> john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] comment about 1995
> 
> So would this change suffice?
> 
> "...evaluates its property expression for each possible valid set of
> loop control variables." =3D=3D> "...evaluates its property expression,
> including any subroutine calls, for each possible valid set of loop
> control variables."
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kulshrestha, Manisha [mailto:Manisha_Kulshrestha@mentor.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 8:28 AM
> To: Seligman, Erik; Korchemny, Dmitry; john.havlicek@freescale.com;
> sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] comment about 1995
> 
> Since subroutine calls are executed in reactive region, it is better to
> explicitly say it.=20
> 
> Manisha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Seligman, Erik [mailto:erik.seligman@intel.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 8:55 PM
> To: Kulshrestha, Manisha; Korchemny, Dmitry;
> john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] comment about 1995
> 
> OK... but right now the proposal says the assertion "evaluates its
> property expression for each possible valid set of loop control
> variables."   Since the subroutine call is part of the expression, isn't
> this already covered?
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kulshrestha, Manisha [mailto:Manisha_Kulshrestha@mentor.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 11:26 PM
> To: Seligman, Erik; Korchemny, Dmitry; john.havlicek@freescale.com;
> sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] comment about 1995
> 
> Eric,
> 
> Here is an example where an argument to the sequence is automatic
> variable which is used in the sequence to pass to a task. You can
> imagine this type of assertion inside a for loop and in1 being the loop
> iterator.
> 
> task my_task(input in);
> reg t;
> 
>   t =3D in;
> 
> endtask
> 
> sequence s(f1, f2);
>   (f1, my_task(f2));
> endsequence
> 
> always @(posedge clk)
> begin
>   automatic reg in1;
> assert property (s(a, in1));
> end
> 
> Manisha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Seligman, Erik [mailto:erik.seligman@intel.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 11:04 PM
> To: Kulshrestha, Manisha; Korchemny, Dmitry;
> john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] comment about 1995
> 
> Hi Manisha--
> 
> I'm not quite sure I understand.  Can you give me a small example code
> fragment that should be legal, but is not currently covered properly by
> the text of 1995?   Thanks!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
> Behalf Of Kulshrestha, Manisha
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 9:07 AM
> To: Kulshrestha, Manisha; Korchemny, Dmitry;
> john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: [sv-ac] comment about 1995
> 
> Hi Eric,
> 
> As you can see from the discussion below Dimitry asked me to say
> explicitly that automatic loop iterator variables should be allowed in
> subroutine calls. I know you allow them in action blocks in 1995 but I
> donot see any mention of them in subroutine calls in the proposal for
> 1995. I think it will be good to say it explicitly in 1995 if we want to
> allow them in subroutine calls. I'll modify my proposal based on that.
> 
> Thanks.
> Manisha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
> Behalf Of Kulshrestha, Manisha
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 3:22 PM
> To: Korchemny, Dmitry; john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] call to vote on 2150
> 
> Hi,
> 
> My comments are included.
> 
> Thanks.
> Manisha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
> Behalf Of Korchemny, Dmitry
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 2:30 PM
> To: john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] call to vote on 2150
> 
> I vote yes on 2150 with the following friendly amendments:
> 
> * Region names should be capitalized. "the reactive region" -> "the
> Reactive region" throughout the proposal.
> 
> MK> I'll fix this.
> 
> * The LRM usually does not explain limitation reasons, therefore I
> believe that the explanation why the automatic variables are disallowed
> is redundant.
> 
> E.g.,
> 
> "Since the action block of an assert statement executes in the reactive
> region, the automatic variables referenced in the action block may not
> be valid when the action block executes. Therefore the action block of
> an assert statement shall not refer to an automatic variable declared
> outside of the action block with an exception: An automatic loop
> iterator variable may be used in the action block of the assert
> statement that is within a for or foreach loop."
> 
> may be rewritten as:
> 
> "The action block of an assert statement shall not refer to an automatic
> variable declared outside of the action block with an exception: An
> automatic loop iterator variable may be used in the action block of the
> assert statement that is within a for or foreach loop."
> 
> Also, should the part of a sentence after a colon be capitalized? Maybe
> to rewrite it as:
> 
> "The action block of an assert statement shall not refer to an automatic
> variable declared outside of the action block with the following
> exception: an automatic loop iterator variable may be used in the action
> block of the assert statement that is within a for or foreach loop."
> 
> MK> I see different things being done at different places in the current
> LRM. Here is an example from 20.3.2: "These counterpart tasks-$fdisplay,
> $fwrite, $fmonitor, and $fstrobe-accept the same type of arguments as
> the tasks upon which they	are based, with one exception: The first
> argument shall be either a multichannel descriptor or a file descriptor,
> which indicates where to direct the file output. Multichannel
> descriptors are described in detail in 20.3.1.
> A multichannel descriptor is either a variable or the result of an
> expression that takes the form of a 32-bit"
> 
> I am not sure which one is correct.
> 
> * The same exception (about for loops) should apply to clause 16.10.
> 
> MK> I'll fix this.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dmitry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
> Behalf Of John Havlicek
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 4:08 AM
> To: sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: [sv-ac] call to vote on 2150
> 
> Hi Folks:
> 
> This is the call to vote on the proposal for Mantis 2150.
> 
> The document on Mantis is
> 
>    automatics_2150_01_11_08.pdf
> 
> Please vote if you are eligible.  See details below.
> 
> J.H.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> Ballot on Mantis 2150
> 
> - Called on 2008-01-15, 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)    =20
>  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 =3D attended
>                 - =3D missed
>                 r =3D represented
>                 . =3D not yet a member
>                 v =3D valid voter (2 out of last 3 or 3/4 overall)
>                 n =3D not a valid voter
>                 t =3D 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.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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.