Attendees:
Mark Hahn, Cadence (Chair)
Dave Barton,
Tom Dewey,
Bob Dilly, IBM
Jim Swift, IBM
New action items:
Who When What
---------- ------ --------
1. Mark 3/30 Check on DAC demo participation from
Mentor, Synopsys, Synplicity
Open action items:
Who When What
---------- ------ --------
1. Jim 1/19 Investigate whether IBM could provide the
-> 2/16 Einstimer educational material as a reference
-> 3/2
-> 3/30
-> 4/13
2. Greg 2/16 Provide a list of PVT-dependent commands from
-> 3/2 BuildGates.
-> 3/30
-> 4/6
3. Mark 3/2 Add operating conditions to the taxonomy
-> 3/30
-> 4/13
4. Mark 3/30 Check on DAC demo participation from
Mentor, Synopsys, Synplicity
-> 4/6
Closed action items:
Who When What
---------- ------ --------
1. Mark 3/2 Look into a working group meeting at DAC
-> 3/30
Next Meeting:
The next meeting will be a teleconference on 4/6
from 9-11 am (PDT).
Details:
1. Review action items
Mentor indicated that they do not plan to participate in the
DAC demo. Still waiting to hear from Synopsys and Synplicity.
Mark arranged a Birds of a Feather session at DAC. We'll need
10 people signed up to hold it. This will be an educational
meeting rather than a face to face working session.
2. Discuss tags
We reviewed the semantics of tags, which may need to be
included in DCDL, although they won't be part of the DAC subset.
Mark and Greg have an action item to decide this.
3. Discuss DAC demo
We talked about the DLX test case again and agreed to focus
on using it.
We discussed whether DCDL should support abbreviations for
commands:
no. When DCDL commands are embedded in an application-specific
TCL script, aliases can be used, but they aren't part of DCDL
itself.
We talked about the arguments -early/-late and -rise/-fall
versus -time, which are different ways to specify the four
values (early rise, late rise, early fall, late fall) for
several commands. The -early/-late and -rise/-fall is the
traditional approach, but it requires specifying the design
object list four times in separate commands. The -time option
allows specifying all four values in a single command, but
the order of the values isn't obvious.
Mark proposed using -early_rise <value> -late_rise <value>
-early_fall <value> -late_rise <value>, which avoids the
ordering ambiguity.
Mark and Bob will follow up with some users to get feedback
on which approach(es) should be used.