[sv-ac] Email ballot result (Due Aug-09)

2485 2558 2412
Yes Yes Yes Eduard Cerny
Yes Yes Yes Ben Cohen
Surrendra Dudani
Abstain Yes Yes Dana Fisman
Yes Yes No John Havlicek
Tapan Kapoor
Yes Yes Yes Manisha Kulshrestha
Yes Yes No Scott Little
Yes Yes Yes Anupam Prabhakar
Yes Yes Yes Erik Seligman
Samik Sengupta
Yes Yes Tom Thatcher

Issues 2485 and 2558 passed: 2485: 8y/0n/1a, 2558: 9y/0n/0a.
Issue 2412 failed.

Friendly amendments and comments:

2485
JH: Friendly amendment: I think that the indefinite article "an" needs to be added: "An immediate assertion statement can be _an_ immediate assert, _an_ immediate assume, or _an_ immediate cover."
TT: I agree with John's friendly amendment adding the indefinite article "an" to the sentence.

2558
JH: Consider adding a reference to 6.21 in place of the text stricken out.

2412
BC: Replace
// e4 used in e5 infers posedge clk_e1 from e5
a2: assert property (@(posedge clk_a) a |=> e5.triggered);
with
// e4, used in e5, infers posedge clk_e1 from e5
a2: assert property (@(posedge clk_a) a |=> e5.triggered);

JH:
[User]

I think that there should be a "For example" lead in for the example added to 16.6.

I think that the "otherwise" for the default clocking rule in 16.9.3 is needed. I think that the rules are contradictory without it. A similar comment applies to the rules proposed for 16.14.6.

I recommend changing "an unclocked sequence" to "a sequence" in

   The following rules are used to infer the clocking event for an unclocked sequence:

Rationale: The inference should apply to any sequence and the clock flow rules should determine how the inferred clock applies to various parts of the sequence instance. For example, the sequence might have no leading clock, but might have a later clock specified.

There are a number of places in the text to be added to 16.14.6 that similarly focus on unclocked sequences. I think that these references should be generalized. Sequence e7, for example, illustrates the clock inference and flow in a partially clocked sequence (and its instances).

SL: I believe these sentences need a bit of work:

If an unclocked sequence with method is passed as an actual in a checker instantiation, it is substituted in place of formal. Such a sequence is clocked as if it was instantiated inside the checker.

If an unclocked sequence with method is passed as an actual in a module instantiation, it is clocked as if it is instantiated at the place of module instantiation.

In both sentences, 'with method' seems awkward to me. How about 'with a method' or 'with an attached method'? The phrase 'of formal' seems like it needs an article. Maybe 'of the formal' would work.

a1 and a4 seem very similar. Are both needed? If not e7 and a4 can be removed.

ES: I think some English-language issues need to be fixed in this proposal:
- Phrasing like "If an unclocked sequence with method...." appears in several places. This needs to be something like "If an unclocked sequence with a method ....".
- "it is substituted in place of formal" è "it is substituted in place of the corresponding formal argument".

I vote YES conditional on these fixes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.