DC-WG: 2/22 meeting minutes


Subject: DC-WG: 2/22 meeting minutes
From: Mark Hahn (mhahn@cadence.com)
Date: Mon Feb 28 2000 - 12:08:54 PST


Meeting minutes from the 2/22/00 DC-WG teleconference
-----------------------------------------------------

Attendees:
  Mark Hahn, Cadence
  Tom Dewey, Mentor
  Bob Dilly, IBM
  John Paul, IBM
  Vikas Sharma, IBM

New action items:

      Who When What
      ---------- ------ --------
 1. Tom 2/29 Update the spec with changes
 2. Mark 2/29 Talk with Lynn Horobin about OVI
                           booth space at DAC
 3. Bob 2/29 Test behavior of relative includes
                           (source) in TCL, along with handling
                           of embedded spaces in the file name
                           for PC compatibility

Next Meeting:

  The next meeting will be a teleconference on 2/29/00
  from 9-11 am (PDT)

Details:
  1. Review status of golden parser

     John Paul is almost ready to ship an updated version of
     the parser. The header comments will roughly reflect the
     desired state for how it will be licensed. Keeping these
     header comments will probably be sufficient; we won't need
     tools that use the parser to display an IBM copyright notice.

     Bob convinced the IBM lawyers that the open source license
     for the Jikes compiler is a good precedent, and that the parser
     itself won't contain any IBM intellectual property. It will
     probably take 8-10 weeks to go through the legal process.

  2. DAC planning

     We talked a lot about what worked for DAC '99 and what didn't.
     Everyone agreed that although proving that DCDL works through
     a complete flow is valuable, actually demonstrating the entire
     flow took too long and was too repetitive.

     We agreed that it makes sense to spend more time with the first
     tool in the flow, showing what the constraints look like in
     DCDL and how they're interpreted by the tool. The complete
     flow would be covered separately in material (a custom CD?)
     distributed at the show or downloadable from the web site.

     We agreed that getting both FPGA and ASIC flows to work again
     is important, as is translation to and from Synopsys SDCs. We
     still need to choose a design; the January issue of ISD Magazine
     has an article where they used the PicoJava design.

  3. Review include command

     We talked a lot about the include command and whether we
     want DCDL to have a distinct command or simply emulate the
     command name and behavior of the TCL source command. The
     main issues are in error handling, interpretation of relative
     file names, and handling of special characters in the file
     name.

     We agreed that the DCDL standard should be clear in certain
     cases on what constitutes an error versus a warning, but that
     DCDL should not specify the tool behavior in response to an
     error. Some tools may choose to take a compiler-like approach,
     trying to continue parsing the DCDL file to find as many errors
     as possible in one shot, while others may want to ensure that
     no invalid constraints are applied to the design.

     It's desirable to interpret relative file names with respect to
     the directory containing the DCDL file that is doing the include/
     source, not with respect to the current working directory of the
     tool. This simplifies copying groups of constraint files. We
     weren't sure which way the TCL source command worked.

     In a TCL script, special characters probably can be used in a
     sourced file name using either double quotes or curly braces.
     But normal file names wouldn't require quoting. In DCDL we
     need to be precise on whether quoting is allowed or required,
     and what to say about variable expansion if it's allowed.

  3. Review design_name_space command

     We agreed that we don't need the -keywords option, since
     DCDL will have well-defined positions in which design object
     names or lists of design objects can appear.

     We talked about differences between VHDL 88 and 93, and agreed
     to have a -version option that takes a string. Having a string
     instead of a keyword reduces synchronization problems between
     the DCDL standard and other standards.

     There is a problem with the -escape option, which doesn't
     currently support SDF style character-by-character escaping.
     There is a related problem with the use of the backslash
     character in the -escape option string; when this string is
     handled first by a TCL interpreter, the interpreter will
     expect two backslashes instead of one.

     We agreed that the design_name_space command should be
     scoped with respect to the DCDL file, not with respect to
     the design hierarchy. This raised the question of whether
     defining a design_name_space within an included file would
     affect the design_name_space used for subsequent commands in
     the parent file. On the one hand, this is undesirable for
     cases where the include files mirror the design hierarchy;
     on the other hand, it's desirable for cases where you want
     to put just the design_name_space definition in a small
     include file and then reuse it multiple times. This is
     very similar to the distinction between sourcing a C shell
     script and invoking it. We talked about adding an option
     to the include/source command to allow both.

Thanks,
Mark

-- 
Mark Hahn                                          phone: (408) 428-5399
Senior Architect                                   fax:   (408) 428-5959
Cadence Design Systems                             email: mhahn@cadence.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Feb 28 2000 - 12:12:26 PST