Dear IEEE P1800 Working Group, Please review the attached meeting minutes from the 19 May 2005 working group meeting and email any corrections you see need to be made. Regards, Dennis ________________________________ IEEE P1800 SystemVerilog Working Group UNAPPROVED MINUTES 19 May 2005 8:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. PDT Mentor Graphics, Wilsonville, OR USA 1 CALL TO ORDER Chair Srouji called the resumption of the meeting to order 9:20 am. Attendance is shown below. Key: DR= Designated Representative DRA= Designated Representative Alternate O=Observer S=Staff Present Entity Name Representative Name Representative Designation IEEE-SA Member Voting Member X Intel Yossi Levy DR Yes Yes X Accellera Karen Pieper DR Yes Yes X Bluespec Rishiyur Nikhil DR Yes Yes X Cadence Design Systems Victor Berman DR Yes Yes X Charles Dawson DRA X IBM Johny Srouji DR Yes Yes X Mentor Graphics Dennis Brophy DR Yes Yes X Dave Rich DRA X Gordon Vreugdenhil DRA X Tom Fitzpatrick DRA X Sun Microsystems Neil Korpusik DR Yes Yes X Sunburst Design Cliff Cummings DR Yes Yes X Sutherland HDL Stu Sutherland DR Yes Yes X Synopsys Oz Levia DR Yes Yes X Arturo Salaz DRA X Fintronic USA Alec Stanculescu DR Yes Yes Observers Staff X IEEE-SA Noelle Humenick Download Roster <http://www.eda-twiki.org/sv-ieee1800/Meetings/2005/May/Roster.pdf> 2 APPROVE AGENDA A motion (Oz Levia, Karen Pieper) was made to approve the agenda. The motion passed unanimously. 3 CALL FOR PATENTS Secretary Brophy read the patent slides. Download Patent Slide set (PowerPoint) <http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt> 4 APPROVAL OF MINTUES A motion (Stu Sutherland, Victor Berman) was made to approve the 19 April 2005 and 5 May 2005 minutes. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION REQUEST [Dennis Brophy]: Post approved minutes. 5 SYSTEMVERILOG AND VERILOG LRM UPDATE Stu is on schedule to make the drafts ready for the 2 June 2005 meeting. The technical team needs to be done by midnight of 29 May 2005 in order for Stu to make the draft publication date for the 2 June 2005 meeting. 6 ACTION ITEMS REVIEW AND FOLLOW-UP The action item list was reviewed and updated as we covered them one by one. Download updated action item list <http://www.eda-twiki.org/sv-ieee1800/Meetings/2005/May/P1800-WG-Action-Items- 05-19-05.htm> Cliff Cummings notes that at one time, 0-In had made claims within Accellera that they may have patents in this area and Verisity also at some point in time asserted they may have claims within the scope of the project as well. Both these companies were purchased by other companies, Mentor Graphics and Cadence Design Systems respectively. The question asked is: have these purchases had an impact on the status of any IEEE patent disclosures or non-disclosures to date? ACTION REQUEST [Johny Srouji]: Request LOAs for patents in the standard from Mentor Graphics and Cadence Design Systems. 7 P1800 FINANCIAL REPORT UPDATE a. Remaining technical editor work budgeting In looking into the payments details and expense details, there is a $4050 overage that needs to be covered. There is an addition $2450 is needed. Accellera will be asked if they can cover this portion of the overage. ACTION REQUEST [Karen Pieper]: As Accellera DR, Karen will contact Accellera chair to request that the $2450 overage be placed on the Accellera agenda on 15 June 2005 to request that they cover this. 8 REVIEW, DISCUSS AND APPROVE OF BALLOT ISSUES LIST, BOTH SYSTEMVERILOG AND VERILOG Karen reviewed the issues outstanding. Download updated issue list <http://www.eda-twiki.org/sv-ieee1800/Meetings/2005/May/Resolved_Issues_05_05_ 18.htm> A motion (Karen Pieper, Oz Levia) was made to accept the changes in 526. The motion passed unanimously. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the changes in 735. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION REQUEST [Noelle Humnik]: Send Karen and Johny the template language for issue we elect not to address. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the proposal to not address 480. The motion passed unanimously. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the changes in 499. The motion passed unanimously. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept issue 713 resolutions. The motion passed unanimously. Cadence brought the issue up and withdrew it. However, there is a noted hole in the system and this solution was good to fix this immediate issue. This is an issue and without respect to it being in place or withdrawn, the issue remains. This is not the end all solution as presented at the moment in 722. Is it a move in the right direction? There is not consensus on this. We want to see if we can get some internal experts from Mentor, Synopsys and Cadence to join. Cadence technical representative felt the conversation to understand this could take a week just to agree on the set of issues. As such, we should take the time later and fix it right. Mentor says this is a problem is left unanswered and if so, all implementations would take individual steps to correct. These steps could be divergent and lead to inoperable solutions. This solves one issue that was identified and this is a good step to take. Synopsys says this is a good first step and keeps the issue open to solve it in the long run. This is a reasonable direction, but it is not the end of it. If we leave it undefined now, from Cadence point of view, we could introduce backward compatibility issues. But the current spec does specify what happens today at #0 others state. If we change this in the future, there will be an observable difference introduced in the future, no matter, Gordon say. Arturo adds that it violates user's intent without the change. So, Gordon's point is he believes a change will be a necessary component of the change needed. And this will reduce any observable changes to implementation with future specs. A motion (Karen Pieper, Neil Korpusik) was made to accept the changes in 722. The motion passed. [Abstained: Cadence Design Systems] A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the changes in 344 with the friendly amendment to change "procedures" to "tasks and functions" in change 17.1 and 17.5. The motion passed unanimously. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the changes in 485. The motion passed unanimously. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the changes in 723. The motion passed unanimously. The number of envelopes shall be no more than 8, but they are still waiting for the encryption committee to sign-off on this. We will accept without any comment from the committee. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the changes in 345 without comment from the encryption committee. The motion passed unanimously. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the changes in 734 and have Neil create one document with all the changes in it. The motion passed unanimously. ACTOIN REQUEST [Neil Korpusik]: Place the documents in mantis item 734. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept the changes in 485. The motion passed unanimously. All issues, 106 to the bottom of the spreadsheet, issue 730 were passed unanimously the committees. A motion (Karen Pieper, Victor Berman) was made to accept all the changes in items 106 to 730 on the spreadsheet generated on the 18 May 2005. The motion passed unanimously. 9 DISCUSSION AND DECISION ON TECHNICAL COMMITTEE WORK AND OPERATION FOR MIDTERM AND LONGTERM In the short-term, we need to have technical discussions. We are doing it now. For the long-term, it is after this version of the LRM is approved, in 2006 and on, that we need to plan. What do we do in the midterm? Shutdown the work of the technical committees or keep the technical committees running? There will be some issues which are not yet resolved and won't be resolved fully like 722. Even users may have questions and they need a place to address these issues. In the midterm, we need a forum to an ISAC - Issue Screening and Analysis Committee. We will address the details of this at our next meeting. After 2 June 2005, Johny will send an email to the technical committees to tell them how we will work in the mid-term. Continue as business as usual for the time being. 10 REVIEW, MODIFICATION & TRACKING OF P1800 WG SCHEDULE Johny reviewed the schedule and updated it as we discussed it. Download the updated schedule <http://www.eda-twiki.org/sv-ieee1800/Meetings/2005/May/P1800_Schedule_v14.htm > The next milestone after this meeting is 24 May 2005 when Stu delivers the draft. Noelle will send the ballot draft letter to Johny. There was discussion of the ballot recirculation package and Noelle will work with Johny and Tom on the recirculation package for P1800 and P1364. 11 NEW BUSINESS None. 9 NEXT MEETINGS 2 June 2005 Teleconference 8 am - 10 am PDT 27 June 2005 Teleconference 8 am - 10 am PDT ACTION REQUEST [Johny Srouji]: Update the schedule with the new date for the June meeting. 10 ADJOURMENT A motion (Dennis Brophy, Victor Berman) was made to adjourn the meeting at 12:19 pmReceived on Wed May 25 16:50:57 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed May 25 2005 - 16:50:58 PDT