DC-WG: 6/13 meeting minutes


Subject: DC-WG: 6/13 meeting minutes
From: Mark Hahn (mhahn@cadence.com)
Date: Mon Jun 19 2000 - 14:39:12 PDT


Meeting minutes from the 6/13/00 DC-WG teleconference
-----------------------------------------------------

Attendees:
  Mark Hahn, Cadence
  Paul Bonnel, Cadence
  Tom Dewey, Mentor
  Bob Dilly, IBM

New action items:

      Who When What
      ---------- ------ --------
 1. Mark 6/20 Check on semantics for clock waveforms with
                           edges shifted by one or more cycles from equivalent
                           minimum edge times
 2. Bob 6/20 Prepare waveform diagrams for waveform and
                           derived_waveform
 3. Mark 6/20 Check on phase shift in derived_waveform
                           (effect on ideal edge position versus effective
                           edge position)
 4. Mark 6/20 Check whether derived_waveform frequency adjustments
                           can be real numbers

Next Meeting:

  The next meeting will be a teleconference on 6/20/00
  from 10-12 am (PDT)

Details:

  1. DAC reports

     We didn't have much input from attendees yet. Tom will
     follow up with Dennis Brophy and Kent Moffet, Bob with Karla Reynolds.

  2. Review changes to waveform, derived_waveform

     We discussed semantics for derived_edges and agreed that
     since we're restricting clock waveforms to just two edges,
     it is unnecessary to have a separate option for edge-specific
     phase shifts. This is covered by the existing -phase_shift
     option.

     Mark raised several ambiguities and took action items to
     clarify them.

  3. Discuss clock_arrival_time, clock_required_time

     We talked about terminology distinctions between
       - assertions
       - constraints
       - directives
       - annotations

     Tom agreed to expand the Basic Terminalogy section to
     define these. clock_required_time is a constraint, while
     clock_arrival_time is an assertion; otherwise they are very
     similar.

     We discussed whether it should be an error for clock_required_time
     to be specified on a port or pin that isn't reachable from a clock
     root. In general, this must be the case, or it isn't possible to
     compute whether the constraint is satisfied.

     Mark raised concerns about the current spec's coverage of
     modes and case analysis issues, and how that affects what should be
     treated as an error. If the regular clock and test clock are muxed
     together, and in the functional_mode currently in effect only the
     test clock is enabled (through setting constants), then the
     clock_required_time may not appear to be downstream of a clock, even
     though it is downstream of the regular clock in a different mode.
     The general solution to this is to support specifying all possible
     modes in DCDL and have tools analyze and optimize with respect to all
     of the modes simultaneously. However, this isn't supported by most
     tools today.

     One way to support specifying all modes in DCDL is to modify
     the functional_mode command to have file scoping semantics.
     If one or more functional_mode commands are given, then each
     command would delimit a portion of the DCDL file for which all
     constraint commands affect just the most recently defined mode.
     Any constraint commands appearing before the first functional_mode
     command would apply to the default mode. We agreed this was a cleaner
     approach than adding a -mode option to each command, but stopped
     short of committing to include this semantics in DCDL.

Thanks,
Mark

-- 
Mark Hahn                                          phone: (408) 428-5399
Senior Architect                                   fax:   (408) 894-3479
Cadence Design Systems                             email: mhahn@cadence.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Jun 19 2000 - 14:46:01 PDT