RE: [sv-ac] Proposal uploaded for Mantis 2654 (Ballot Comment #93)

Hi Tom,

Fig 16-14: if it shows sampled values, then I do not think the figure is wrong, it is missing the failures, but the success is correct. The figures rely on the fact that sampled values are shown.

ed


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Thomas Thatcher
> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 2:24 PM
> To: Lisa Piper
> Cc: sv-ac@eda.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-ac] Proposal uploaded for Mantis 2654 (Ballot Comment
> #93)
>
> Hi Lisa,
>
> The other diagram don't just LOOK off.  They are wrong!
>
> In Fig 16-13, the same waveform changes need to be made that I made for
> Fig 16-12.
>
> Fig 16-14 is just plain Wrong!  If you look at the property:
>
>      property data_end;
>         @(posedge mclk)
>         data_phase |-> ((irdy==0) && ($fell(trdy) || $fell(stop))) ;
>      endproperty
>
> In the waveform given in 16-14, the property succeeds in cycle 7, not
> in
> cycle 6.  However, the Property Fails in cycles 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9!
> This is not shown in the figure.
>
> With this example, it might be better to just reverse the implication.
> The property as written doesn't really make sense.  i.e.
>
>         ((irdy==0) && ($fell(trdy) || $fell(stop))) |-> data_phase
>
> Figures 16-15 and 16-16 are wrong as well.  In Figure 16-15 the
> sequence
> data_end_exp should match in cycle 7, and data_end_rule should evaluate
> to true in cycle 9.  Figure 16-16 repeats the error from 16.14.
>
> However, since the comment only mentioned one figure, we probably don't
> have authority to change all four diagrams.  I will change both 16-12
> and 16-13, as they are part of the same example.
>
>
> Our options:
> 1.  Make the change I suggested, moving the signal transitions to the
> middle of the cycle.
> 2.  We could pull the signal transitions all the way to the previous
> cycle.  If we did this, I would add the "the sampled value" to the text
> explanation below, like this:
>
>         Because the sampled value of signal burst_mode is hight at
> clock
>         tick 1 and low at clock tick 2 . . .
>
> 3.  We could leave the signal transitions alone.  If we did that, we
> would need to edit the figure anyway to move the match indications one
> cycle later.  We would then need to edit the explanation text to change
> the cycle numbers.
>
> Tom
>
> On 04/23/09 18:53, Lisa Piper wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> >
> >
> > The problem I have with this solution is that it makes other diagrams
> > look off too.  For example - Figure 16.13 and 16.14. I thought
> someone
> > (Ed??) was going to look at clarifying that the signals shown in the
> > diagram are actually depicting the sampled values of signals, in
> which
> > case the change would be to say:
> >
> >
> >
> > "Because the sampled value of signal burst_mode is high at clock tick
> 1
> > and low at clock tick 2, $fell(burst_mode) is true at
> >
> > clock tick 2."
> >
> >
> >
> > Lisa
> >
> >
> >
> > Ps Figure 16.14 is misplaced too in my copy
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org]
> On
> > Behalf Of Thomas Thatcher
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 12:59 PM
> > To: sv-ac@server.eda.org
> > Subject: [sv-ac] Proposal uploaded for Mantis 2654 (Ballot Comment
> #93)
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello Everyone,
> >
> >
> >
> > I have uploaded a proposal for Mantis 2654 (ballot comment #93).  The
> >
> > solution for this comment was simply to edit Figure 16-12, and move
> the
> >
> > signal transitions forward to the middle of the cycle, before the
> clock
> >
> > edge.  I re-created part of the figure to illustrate the change.  Let
> me
> >
> > know if I need to do something more to help the editor with this
> change.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > 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.