Latest rev of sce-mi document

Hi Everyone,
     The latest rev of the sce-mi spec is now up on the web site on the
Issues page. I just noticed that I forgot to update the date on the
document, so please ignore it. The current rev level is 1.0.3. I am also
including an email that per sent to me regarding the status of some
issues. Since he has done such a good job of summarizing it, I will use
his work. Sorry, but I have not updated the Issue status on the web site
yet, so this is out of date.

Regards
Brian

Hi Brian,

here is the list of issues that have come up in the past month and
half that have not made it into the issues list yet:

  1) Recursion in ServiceLoop() and the g() function. This is
     related to IM24 but different enough to warrant a separate
     issue. http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0245.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0245.html>

  2) Questions about input-ready propagation
     http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0250.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0250.html>

     I had three questions and got one reply from John, but the
     questions are not fully resolved.

  3) SCE-MI initialization and binding during SystemC constructors
     http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0256.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0256.html>

  4) SCE-MI error handling questions and observations
     http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0259.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0259.html>

     There are three sub-issues here:

     a) Can the implementation call the error handler even if all
        API calls are done with a non-NULL SceMiEC pointer?

     b) Is it OK to mix the error handling styles (NULL and non-NULL
        SceMiEC) on different calls?

     c) The recoverable error thread which has split into these
        other threads:

        http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0272.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0272.html>
        http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0285.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0285.html>
        http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0288.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0288.html>

  5) C++ exceptions from SCE-MI error and/or info handler?
     http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0265.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0265.html>

  6) Modifying and/or sending message received: is it legal?
     http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0268.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0268.html>

     I have received no response on this one yet.

That appears to be it for new issues for now.

In terms of old issues, here is the list of issues I think still need
some discussion:

  IM05: On June 21 I sent out updated text to reflect the changes to
        clock control semantics. I've received no response yet.

  IM06: I am still not comfortable with the rewording as it currently
        stands. I sent an email on June 23 with cleaned up rewording
        and some questions. I've received no feedback yet.

  IM11: I've reviewed John's latest C++ headers and have a few nits
        to discuss. I'll send out an email given we won't have a
        meeting available to discuss these.

  IM13: Is still unresolved.

  IM14 and IM15: I sent out a combined rewording for these two on May 12
        and a waveform diagram on May 25. I have not received any feedback
        on the latter. On the former, I think we had some discussion at
        a meeting, but I am not sure what the conclusion was except to
        request the diagram. I'd like some feedback as to whether the
        diagram captures what the people requesting it wanted it to
        show. I think Richard Newell was one of the people asking for this
        diagram.

  IM18: Is resolved, I believe. The issue on the web page does not include
        John's rewording proposal. It is here:
        http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0241.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0241.html>

  IM19: A few meetings back we agreed in general to John's rewording
proposal
        but there was consensus to clean up the rewording a little bit. I
        have not seen the updated rewording from John. Actually, the issue
        on the web page does not include the rewording proposal from John.
        It is here: http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0242.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0242.html>

  IM23: I think we had consensus for proposal 2 at one meeting some time
        back. It was a meeting Duaine led probably back in May.

  IM24: Service loop recursion. This is still open in my mind. Perhaps
        not whether it is allowed, but rather whether the spec needs to
        explicitly allow it or not. I don't think we can resolve this
        one until we have resolved IM06.

  IM25: I'm not sure what the status here is. The discussion started here
        http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0220.html
<http://www.eda.org/itc/hm/0220.html> but later branched into the
        discussion on recoverable errors.

Enjoy,
Per
Received on Fri Jul 9 10:14:11 2004