Hi,
Here are my votes.
I opposed a few, approved most, and abstained on 3069 for lack of review time (I was on vacation for a while). Some of the approvals contain comments.
Regards,
Shalom
1. 2476 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2476> SV-AC Need
clarification about system functions $onehot, etc
There is a proposal (7 pages)
The proposal was opposed by the Champion's in the email vote which
ended on April 8th, 2011. The proposal was updated based on the
Champion's feedback. The updated proposal seems to work-around the
problem that Dave saw with 1'b1 versus 2'01.
The amended proposal passed by voice vote 2011-07-19: 10y/0n/0a.
Approve __ Oppose _x_
- Keywords used in the text should be bold. Example: in 20.9, "This function returns an int ...". 'int' should be bold.
- 11.2.1 needs to be modified to allow the bit vector system functions as constant system functions.
- 20.6.3 contains the following: 'Given the declaration "parameter int i = $;" then $isunbounded(i) shall return true. Otherwise, it shall return false. True and false are defined in 20.13.' However, true and false are no longer defined in 20.13 after this proposal. I think the last sentence in 20.6.3 can simply be deleted.
- I will also agree with Brad's reservations.
2. 3113 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3113> SV-AC Add
port_identifier to constant_primary BNF for sequences, properties
and checkers
There is a proposal (6 pages with several small changes).
The proposal was opposed by the Champion's twice. This is the
third time it has gone to the Champion's. There was only one
objection from the most recent review.
The amended proposal was approved by email ballot 2011-07-18:
10y/0n/0a.
Approve __ Oppose _x_
- The file header should state what Mantis it belongs to.
- In 16.8, "formal_port_identifier ::= port_identifier" should be "identifier" instead of "port_identifier", as in A.9.3
- In Syntax 1702 and A.4.1.4,
" named_checker_port_connection ::=
{ attribute_instance } . port_identifier [ ( [ property_actual_arg ] ) ]
| { attribute_instance } .*",
"port_identifier" should be changed to "formal_port_identifier".
3. 3015 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3015> SV-AC Examples of
$fatal have bad arguments
There is a proposal (1 page)
This is the first time this short proposal has gone to the
Champion's.
Passed by voice vote 2011-07-19: 10y/0n/0a.
Approve _x_ Oppose __
4. 3459 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3459> SV-CC DPI section
"H.6.6 Pure functions" is redundant and should be removed
There is a proposal (2 pages) - deletes a sub-clause.
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
On Apr-27-2011, the SV-CC PASSED this proposal (unanimous)
Approve _x_ Oppose __
5. 3272 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3272> SV-CC two
cross-references are not hyperlinked
There is a proposal (3 pages).
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
On May-11-2011, the SV-CC PASSED this proposal (unanimous)
Approve _x_ Oppose __
6. 3522 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3522> SV-CC
vpiStringConst, not vpiStringVal, as possible value of vpiConstType
There is a proposal (with a one word change).
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
On May-11-2011, the SV-CC PASSED this proposal (unanimous)
Approve _x_ Oppose __
7. 3118 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3118> SV-CC Typo in
H.7.7 Canonical representation of packed arrays
There is a proposal (with a one word change).
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
On Jun-08-2011, the SV-CC PASSED this proposal (unanimous)
Approve _x_ Oppose __
8. 1352 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=1352> SV-CC VPI 27.37
"Multiclock sequence expression" error
There is a proposal (deletes one diagram and updates another)
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
On Jun-08-2011, the SV-CC PASSED this proposal (unanimous)
Approve __ Oppose _x_
I think the proper place for 'property inst' is in 37.48 ('Property specification'), just as 'Sequence inst' is in 37.50 ('Sequence expression') and not in 37.49 ('Sequence declaration').
9. 3599 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3599> SV-CC svBitVecVal
as reference type is missing asterisk
There is a proposal (changes the font for one word and adds an *).
I found it very difficult to locate this update. It seems to me
that the Editor may miss it.
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
On Jun-22-2011, the SV-CC PASSED this proposal (unanimous)
Approve _x_ Oppose __
10. 3385 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3385> SV-AC Possible
ambiguity when deferred assertion action block calls nested function
There is a proposal (2 pages) that adds new text.
This is the second time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
Passed by voice vote 2011-07-12: 10y/0n/0a.
Approve _x_ Oppose __
Friendly amendments:
- The text contains this sentence:
"Actual argument expressions that are passed by value use the values of the underlying variables at the instant the deferred assertion expression was evaluated."
and adds this sentence:
"Actual argument expressions that are passed by value, including function calls, shall be fully evaluated at the time the deferred assertion expression is evaluated."
Doesn't the second sentence make the first redundant?
In any case, the text should be made consistent: "at the instant" vs. "at the time", "was
evaluated" vs. "is evaluated".
- In the code example, the quotation marks should be straight.
- In the sentence, "Suppose block b1 is executed twice in the Active region of a single time step, with my_cond == 0, so it fails assertion a1 both times," the end should probably be, "fails assertions a1 and a2 both times."
11. 2412 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2412> SV-AC Allow clock
inference in sequences
There is a proposal (5 pages)
This is the 4th time this proposal has gone to the Champions.
The amended proposal was approved by e-mail ballot on 6/28/2011:
8y/0n/0a
Approve _x_ Oppose __
12. 3069 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=3069> SV-AC Relax rules
for $global_clock resolution
There is a proposal (6 pages)
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
The proposal was approved by the SV-AC on 6/21/2011 6y, 0n, 0a
Approve __ Oppose __ Abstain _x_
13. 2794 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2794> SV-EC Clarify
queue methods return status
There is a proposal (2 pages)
The champion's feedback of September 29th was addressed.
Proposal 2794-3a was unanimously approved by the sv-ec in the
conference call held on July 18, 2011.
Approve _x_ Oppose __
Note: The reference to Mantis 1076 should be 1067.
14. 2112 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2112> SV-EC Remove
restrictions on NBA assignments to class members
There is a proposal (2 pages)
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
Version 4 of the proposal (2112 NBA v4) was unanimously approved
by the sv-ec in the conference call held on July 18, 2011.
Approve _x_ Oppose __
The proposal should have a header line stating the number of the Mantis item (and preferably also the subject of the proposal).
15. 2900 <http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2900> SV-EC Associative
array should consider the context of an lvalue to create an entry
There is a proposal (1 page)
This is the first time this proposal has gone to the Champion's.
Version 4 of the proposal (2900 assoc lvalue v4) was unanimously
approved by the sv-ec in the conference call held on July 18, 2011.
Approve _x_ Oppose __
As Brad pointed out, the keywords need to be bolded.
Also, the character beginning the initialization value '{default:1} should be a straight apostrophe, not a backward-pointing accent grave character.
Also, I think the change in the opening text in 7.8, from "an entry is created the first time it is written" to "An entry for a nonexistent associative array element shall be allocated when it is used as the target of an assignment or actual to an argument passed by reference," was unnecessary. 7.8 is descriptive overview text. The detailed information follows and the new text also appears in 7.8.7. Putting it in the overview makes the overview a little awkward.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Fri Aug 5 01:32:23 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Aug 05 2011 - 01:32:25 PDT