Even though what I said is also correct..., I intended to say: "... we could suffice supporting only blocking unidirectional interface and yet be TLM compliant (We still need to look at this however from all other perspectives)." >I have already checked this with a TLM expert at Cadence and found out >that TLM does NOT require that we support all interface types. So from >TLM compliance stand point, we could suffice supporting only >non-blocking unidirectional interface and yet be TLM compliant (We still >need to look at this however from all other perspectives). > > > > > >> >Received on Wed Feb 1 17:43:07 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Feb 01 2006 - 17:43:14 PST