Hi John, I added several bug notes according to your comments, the rest of the items I suggest to send to Stu or to open new Mantis items to address them later. See my detailed comments below. Thanks, Dmitry -----Original Message----- From: John Havlicek [mailto:john.havlicek@freescale.com] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 5:56 PM To: sv-ac@eda.org Cc: Korchemny, Dmitry Subject: my cross review results so far Hi All: Below are the results of my cross review so far. I am still reading 16.13.17, the rest of 16.13, and 16.14. J.H. Draft 7 Cross Review: --------------------- 16.11 ----- . No issue found. 16.12 ----- . There is an inconsistency of fonts used for "X" and "Z". In the item for $isunkown, they are set in Courier, but in the last sentence of the section they are set in Roman. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13 ----- . The use of "a checker" in the second sentence of the section clashes with the new checker construct and should be changed to "an obligation". [Korchemny, Dmitry] I added a bug note to 1900. . A named property may be declared in a checker, but this location is not in the list at the beginning of the section. [Korchemny, Dmitry] I added a bug note to 1900. . There should be no red semicolon after property_statement_spec in the production for property_declaration in Syntax 16-16. [Korchemny, Dmitry] There is a bug note in 2173 (7541) - already implemented by Stu in Draft7a. . In the future, we should fold together some of the RHSs of the production for property_expr, e.g. combine nexttime property_expr nexttime \[ constant_expression \] property_expr into nexttime [ \[ constant_expression \] ] property_expr where "[]" are the black non-bold brackets used to denote an optional part of the syntax and "\[\]" are the bold red brackets used to denote syntax terminals. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Open a new Mantis item to address later. . Change A formal argument may be referenced in the body property_spec of the declaration of the named property. to A formal argument may be referenced in the body property_statement_spec of the declaration of the named property. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. . I don't think it is possible any longer for a reference to a property formal argument to stand in the place of a property_spec. I don't think it should be possible for a property formal argument to stand in the place of a property_statement_spec. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Open a new Mantis item to address later. . The paragraph beginning A disable iff clause can be attached to a property_expr to yield a property_spec. needs to account also for a property_statement and a property_statement_spec. This can be done by changing property_expr to property_expr (resp., property_statement) and changing property_spec to property_spec (resp., property_statement_spec) throughout the paragraph. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.1 ------- . Change the title of this section to "Sequential property" and change the first sentence from Sequence properties ... to Sequential properties ... Rationale: Consistency. The phrase "sequential property" is used throughout, and "sequence property" only appears in the section title and the beginning of the first sentence. However, the other sections seem to follow the form "<noun> property" rather than "<adjective> property", so an alternative would be to change "sequential property" to "sequence property" throughout. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.3 ------- . Change property_expr or property_expr to property_expr1 or property_expr2 Rationale: The sentence following refers to "property_expr1" and "property_expr2", but they are nowhere to be found. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.4 ------- . Change property_expr and property_expr to property_expr1 and property_expr2 Rationale: The sentence following refers to "property_expr1" and "property_expr2", but they are nowhere to be found. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.5 ------- . Change if (expression_or_dist) property_expr else property_expr to if (expression_or_dist) property_expr1 and property_expr2 Rationale: The second sentence following refers to "property_expr1" and "property_expr2", but they are nowhere to be found. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.6 ------- . In Syntax 16-17, change "->" to "|->" and change "=>" to "|=>". [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. . The discussion of property data_endand the waveform in Figure 16-14 are suspect because there are many failing scenarios not mentioned and because the label of the figure is "Conditional sequence matching" when this is a section about properties. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Open a new Mantis item to address later. . What is the "sequence specification" referenced in the following? This section is about properties. Signal irdy transitions to high at clock tick 8, matching the sequence specification completely for the attempt that began at clock tick 6. Figure 16-15 is also labelled in a strange way -- "Conditional sequences". [Korchemny, Dmitry] Open a new Mantis item to address later. 16.13.7 ------- . Change property_expr implies property_expr to property_expr1 implies property_expr2 Rationale: The sentence following refers to "property_expr1" and "property_expr2", but they are nowhere to be found. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. . Change property_expr iff property_expr to property_expr1 iff property_expr2 Rationale: The sentence following refers to "property_expr1" and "property_expr2", but they are nowhere to be found. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.8 ------- . Change "body property_spec" to "body property_statement_spec". [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.9 ------- . Change "This clause is used to trigger" to "These forms are used to trigger". Rationale: This sentence is not referring to clauses in the LRM, so the use of "clause" is confusing. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.10 -------- . No issue found. 16.13.11 -------- . No issue found. 16.13.12 -------- . Change The property p4 evaluates to true provided that there exist a current or future clock tick to The property p4 evaluates to true provided that there exists a current or future clock tick Rationale: Grammar. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.13 -------- . Change The property p2 evaluates to true if, and only if, there exist a current or future clock tick to The property p2 evaluates to true if, and only if, there exists a current or future clock tick Rationale: Grammar. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. . Change The property p5 evaluates to true if, and only if, there exist a clock tick to The property p5 evaluates to true if, and only if, there exists a clock tick Rationale: Grammar. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. . Change The property p7 evaluates to true if, and only if, there exist a clock tick to The property p7 evaluates to true if, and only if, there exists a clock tick Rationale: Grammar. [Korchemny, Dmitry] Send to Stu. 16.13.14 -------- . No issue found. 16.13.15 -------- . No issue found. 16.13.16 -------- . Did not re-review. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.Received on Thu Oct 23 03:39:35 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 23 2008 - 03:40:45 PDT