SV-EC Committee Meeting Tuesday March 25 2008 9:30am - 11:00am PDT [ http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_March_25_2008_Minutes.txt ] With the new calculations for voting rights below (rounded)... 3/4 rule = 0.75 * 40 = 30 Meeting number: ------------------------------------------------ 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000111111111122222222223333333333334 123456789012345678901234567890123344567890 Meeting Days: ------------------------------------------------ (121202020102020101311202020101212011020012) Day (481593604882505956041593606715926307724375) (000011111100000000000000000011111111000000) Month (889900112211223344456677889900011222112333) (000000000000000000000000000000000000000000) Year (666666666677777777777777777777777777888888) ------ Attendees ---------------------------- (-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-AAAA-A--AAAAA*AA*AAAAAA) Arturo Salz 35 (--AAA-AAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAA--A-A-AAA*A*AAAAA-) Cliff Cummings 31 (AAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*A*AAAAAA) Dave Rich 39 (AA-A-AAA-AAAAAAA---AAAAAAAAAAAAAA*A*AAAAAA) Francoise Martinolle 34 (-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAA-AA*A*AAAAAA) Mehdi Mohtashemi 37 (AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAA*A*AAAAAA) Neil Korpusik 39 (AAAAAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*A*AAAA-A) Ray Ryan 38 (AAAAAAAAAAAA-AAA---AAA-AAAAAAAAAA*A*A-AAAA) Gordon Vreugdenhil 34 (AAAAAA--AAAAA-A--AAAAAAAAA-AAAAAA**AAAAAAA) Steven Sharp 34 (--AAAA-A-------------------------*-*------) Phil Moorby 05 - Non-voting (---AA-AAA-AAAA-AA-A--------------*-*------) Doug Warmke 12 - Non-voting (AAAAAAA---AA-A-AAAAAAA---AAAAAAAA**AA--AA-) Stu Sutherland 29 (-AAAA--AAAA-A-AAAAA-AAAA-AAAAAAAA*A*-AAAAA) Heath Chambers 32 (-AAAAAA-A----AAAAAAAAA--AAAAAAA-A*A*AAAAA-) Don Mills 30 (--AA--A---A-AAA--A-AAAA-A-A--A--A*-*AA--AA) Jonathan Bromley 20 - (2 of last 3) (--A------------------------------*-*------) Logie Ramachandran 01 - Non-voting (----AAA--------------------------*-*------) Melvin Cardoza 03 - Non-votings (-----A-AAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*A*AAAAAA) Mark Hartoog 33 (-------A-------------A-----------*-*------) Satia (from Intel) 02 - Non-voting (--------AAA----------------------*-*------) Rob Slater 03 - Non-votings (-------------A-------------------*-*------) Alex Gran - Mentor 01 - Non-voting (---------------A-AAA-AAAAA--A-AA-*A*A-----) Mike Mintz 14 - (2 of last 3) (------------------AAAAAAAAAAAA-A-*-*------) Geoffrey Coram 13 - Non-voting (-------------------AAAAAAAAAA-AAA*A*AAAAAA) David Scott - Mentor 20 - (2 of last 3) (------------------------A--------*-*------) Benjamin Chen - Cisco 01 - Non-votings (---------------------------AAAAAA*A*-AA-AA) Mike Burns - Freescale 11 (2 of last 3) (----------------------------------*A------) Harry King - Cisco 01 - Non-voting (--------------------------------------A---) Karen Pieper 01 - non-voting on March/25/2008 [for next meeting] 15 people (other than the chair) currently have voting rights ** Minutes taken by Neil Korpusik and Mehdi Mohtashemi ////////////////// March 25, 2008 ///////////////////////// Agenda: ------- 1. Review IEEE patent policy ------------------------- ref: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Move: Heath - Assume that the patent policy was read Second: Mark Abstain: None Opposed: None Passed unanimously 2. Review meeting minutes/Notes: ------------------------------------------------- Previous meeting: March 17 2008, http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_March_17_2008_Minutes.txt Move: Heath Second: David Abstain: Mike B Opposed: None Approved 3. Updates from p1800WG, Champions meetings -------------------------------------------------- Next p1800WG meeting on Thursday 27th. Neil: Champions had a meeting on March 20 2008, For mantis: from sv-ec: 2243, passed unanimously. Also there is a proposal to form sub-comittee from all groups. If it is agreed it is formed, everyone will be notified. List that came from checker, 1900 depends on, needs to be reviewed. 4. Immediate issues to review ----------------------------------------------------------- a) additional mantis items (permission granted by p1800WG) 1897, 2242, http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1897 http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2242 2242: David: sent out the latest proposal. More explicit with an example at the end. Gord: if we view the coverage points as a grid you can then slice it different ways. Advanced users could do some interesting things with it. Move: David -- approve the proposal for 2242 Second: Heath Abstain: None Opposed: None Passed unanimously b) from champions feedback 2183 -- in feedback state http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2183 Ray: updated the proposal. the champions were questioning one statement in the proposal. -"Each expression in an 'expression_list' must simply identify a random variable." - added a bug note explaining his reasoning The statement flagged by the champions was removed. - Setting t1 to x+y will not constrain x or y rand int x,y,z; rand int t1; constraint C { t1 == x+y; solve t1 before z; // z was x in the bug note } - The text on the restrictions was getting complicated This example is legal. It maybe ok to allow any integral expression, you can do it with the current LRM. Jonathan:I noticed Arturo responded, seems to think that you were using the constraint. x+y is not a constrained. Ray: I do not think it introduces new constraint. Arturo: solving x before y doesn't, it modifies the distribution of x+y. Ray : just changes the distribution of how selected. Arturo :trying to bias the value of x+y. Ray: it doesn't constrain the value of x+y. it will modify the distribution of x+y Arturo : it creates a new constraint. Ray : x+y would have an even distribution Steven : when x is large, y must be small. Arturo : this proposal creates a shorthand. - creates a new constraint (on x+y) It is a biasing constraint - x+y is constrained, doesn't impose a distribution on it. Ray: as long as the temporary variable is the same type as the expression it is equal to... Arturo: putting an expr in the constraint then run into difficulties (type issues - what is type of x+y) some size and signedness. Steven: it will be a self-determined type Arturo: may not work due to wrap-around Steven: if modulo arithmetic it doesn't affect x or y (?) Arturo: ran into difficulties writing bnf when listing the restrictions Ray: yes, tried allowing any expression to simplify all of this. Arturo: we would need to define what it means. - an identity of some undeclared variable. Gord: in terms of width and sign it is well-defined - in terms of exact bound of a resulting vector are not well defined. Mark: it is true, as long as this is a self-determined context. Ray: it introduces an identity constraint. Arturo: Formalize it, and we use wrap-around to use it. Ray: The term "simple_variable" is not acceptible. Jonathan: you do not have to worry about it, just say allowed for any expression Ray: if you say that solve-before-constraint has an idenitity, you could end up with a infinitely recursive definition Mike: sounds like you're trying to write the expression. We do not want to add the feature of allowing general expression, just what we can put there. Arturo: it is interesting shorthand Ray: looking for simplification not obsfucation. Jonathan: this enhancement could possibly be useful in the presense of macros Arturo: memories Ray: for an element of an array must be a constant expression or interactive loop indice Ray: today, can't solve over the elements of a dynamic array(?) Mike: unparenthesized expression primary. Arturo: $root, packages, etc. would need to be addressed. The proposal is close. Francoise: can we talk about expression which prefix random variable. Ray: the root item must be part of randomization, if not it is state variable Mike: it would be a bug. Francoise: it should just be a no-op. Mike: implementors can add warning. Ray: there is already caveat in LRM, that constraint solver can solve in any order as long as the effect is similar. Neil: March 31 - is next Monday. an abbreviated email vote is possible. Mehdi: we could do a 3-day email vote if the proposal is available today there was agreement on having an email vote ending on Friday. AI:Ray - update the proposal for an email vote. 2279 -- in feedback state http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2279 Jonathan: there are 2 proposals my proposal is proposal 1b. Sahlom raised extensive issues,inconsistencies with LRM, which I created proposal 2. Feedback was not about 1858, it was about syntax boxes that it touched. my proposal 1b adds the change in normative statements in Annex A. Shalom raised issue about inconsistencies on requirements for () Annex A - the only normative one 17.7 - object randomize 17.12 - scope randomize Annex G - std package Francoise: the word checker could be confusing (long proposal) Jonathan: 17.9 - just use same 17.12 - need to take out word checker. a.8.2 - more tricky p. 2 - adds change from 1858 to the formal syntax. A.10 - making things consistent G.4 - changed int to bit Francoise: 17.12 - production for randomize - but not in annex A Ray: it does not seem to be wrong. Mike: it looks fine to me, but do not know if this breaks Arturo: with() only allowed with randomize call. Ray: thought with() clause was part of a function call. Neil: how is this related to 17.12.1, randomize call. where it talks about std::randomize with(), how it affects it. Jonathan: the one after with clause was by 1858 to disambiguate it. suggests leaving this in (scope randomize) Neil: the use of with here is different from 17.12.1 (answer is yes) Friendly amendments Francoise: (1) change bit back to int (2) change the word checker Move: Francoise -- approve the proposal for 2279-jb2a.pdf Second: Heath Abstain: None Opposed: None Passed unanimously 2302 http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2302 [file 2302-v1.pdf added] Mike: removed one sentence from the LRM (at the end of 7.4.2) "If an unpacked array has one or more dynamic, associative, or queued dimensions, it is considered a variable-size array." Ray: is the text there in the LRM? Mike: it is 17.2 page 118 of draft 4., 1447 left unedited. Steven: what definition does that use, Mike: we went through this last, only place was stream concatenation Francoise: there are other places that we say variable_array. 11.4.14.1 Jonathan thinks this one is ok 13.5.2 7.4.2 page 118 7.11 Mike: this definition reaches into element types to determine what the overall definition is. Francoise: prefers to leave the sentence in the lrm for now. Mike: 1447 is in, this is just an additional mantis item. Move: Mike -- approve the proposal for 2302-v1.pdf Second: Heath Abstain: None Opposed: None Passed unanimously 2303 http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2303 No Proposal yet. 5. Next meetings in 2008 ---------------------- back to regular day/time: Monday April 14 2008 11:00-1:00pm