SV-EC Committee Meeting Monday May 22 2006 11:00am - 1:00pm PST [Minutes distributed for approval at next (sv-ec) committee meeting] (102112102 ) Day (993337082 ) (100000000 ) Month (211233455 ) (000000000 ) Year (566666666 ) --------- Attendees ---------- (AAAAAAAAA ) Arturo Salz (-AAA-A-AA ) Cliff Cummings (A-AAAAAAA ) Dave Rich (AAAAAAAAA ) Francoise Martinolle (AAAAAAAAA ) Mehdi Mohtashemi (AAAAAAAAA ) Neil Korpusik (AAAAAAaAA ) Ray Ryan (--AAAaaA- ) Surrendra Dudani (-AAAAA-AA ) Gordon Vreugdenhil (----AAAAA ) Steven Sharp (-A--AA--- ) Phil Moorby (AA------- ) Doug Warmke (---AAA--- ) Stu Sutherland (-----a--- ) Don Mills (Aa------- ) Chris Spear (--------- ) Brad Pierce (--------- ) Karen Pieper ^^------------ Considered ONE MEETING. ** Minutes taken by Neil Korpusik and Mehdi Mohtashemi ////////////////// May 22, 2006 ///////////////////////// Agenda: 1. IEEE patent policy ref: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Move: Gord - Assume that the patent policy was read Second: Arturo Abstain: none Opposed: none passed Agenda: 1) Review IEEE patent policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt 2) Review Meeting minutes, of and April 10th 2006 and May 8th, 2006 http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_April_10_2006_Minutes.txt http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_May_8_2006_Minutes.txt Motion: Ray - approve meeting minutes of April 10, 2006 Second: Dave Oppose: none Abstain: none Passed Unanimously Motion: Ray - approve meeting minutes of May 8, 2006 Second: Dave Oppose: none Abstain: none Passed Unanimously 3. Review Action item list: Action items: May 8, 2006 ------------------------- AI: 1256 Gord - will add some comments (bug notes) to mantis 1256. AI: 978 Neil - redo the proposal, not a real proposal yet. [done] AI: 976 Dave - put a proper proposal in place AI: 960 Mehdi - discuss this with Matt to resolve the overlap. AI: sort list by items with proper proposal (some are marked immediate) Action items: April 10, 2006 ----------------------------- AI: 1330 Dave: add an example (not done yet) -->Found a bunch of modport issues and virtual interface issues in the process. AI: 1279 Mehdi: check with Brad on syntax boxes that don't appear in the appendix. What does it mean to have a syntax diagram which isn't in the appendix? : syntax box in 18.6 not in Annex A *** (Input from Brad: ) -----Original Message----- From: Mehdi Mohtashemi Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 9:18 AM To: Brad Pierce Subject: question from sv-ec Hi Brad, In the last sv-ec meeting there was a question about syntax box which was not in the appendix A. Specifically the syntax diagram box in 18.6 which is not in Annex A. Can you review this and clarify for me. There maybe more syntax diagrams that are not reflected in Annex A, however, no one was sure what that would mean. RESPONSE:(from Brad) Some syntax boxes are illustrative specializations of the BNF in Annex A, not actual excerpts from Annex A. Anything accepted by one of these specializations should also be accepted by the BNF of Annex A. -- Brad AI: 261/262 Steven: put together some examples of overflow AI: 261/262 Arturo: unsigned/signed examples. Action items: March 13, 2006 ---------------------------- AI: new item - Gordon to create a new mantis item for randomize() method call item (Ray, Gordon have discussed - still working on it internally) Action items: February 13, 2006 ------------------------------- AI: 1279 - Ray - add a new Mantis item for the visibility issue. [Done] 4. Mantis items that have a proposal Coverage Related: ---------------------------------------- 1279 clarify covergroup/point/cross (Ray) Ray - the old proposal can be deleted from mantis. AI/Ray - missing } for coverpoint c. Ray: updated proposal. limits visibility to coverpoint name you can see inside the cross, coverpoint name exists just as a name. coverpoint x, the second one coverpoint names are context sensitive in terms of visiblity same thing applies to cross, more limited, it always have to have prefix, .prefix or :: to allow cover point to be visible externally, Francoise: similar to protected? Ray: actually somewhat opposite to protected, internally can only reference as part of a cross. Gord: internal access to x will be with respect to the argument. Arturo: one case that is illegal, x as a lable collides with ref arg. Cliff: the example crosses x with x (Arturo - it doesn't really make sense but demonstrates what is legal) Gord:should modify coverpoint d to be for argument y (so we can keep the statement "coverpoint x;"). Gord: think of formals, as in namespace argument, externally the only thing is visible is coverpoint namespace. Francoise: package name needed to be added to the list in 7.21. Friendly amendment, introduce a ref arg 'y', additional coverpoint AI/Ray - use a different ref arg for coverpoint c. AI/Ray - x: coverpoint y; // illegal <-- add to the example (arturo, cliff) - b: coverpoint y; AI/Ray - add package name back in. Editorial: it would be meaningless to add coverpoint/or cross on non-ref args. it is set at the new , and not change. Note: later in the meeting Ray had finished making the required changes. It was reviewed again and then voted. All AIs above were completed. Motion: Ray - approve 1279, with proposal errata_1279d.html Second: Cliff Oppose: none Abstain: none Passed Unanimously 1313 No definition for coverpoint and bin expression type rules (Gord) Gord - bin expressions - want to evaluate in the mathematical domain, as oppsed to the Verilog domain. - 0:9 for a 3-bit cp expression, for example (9 not representable) Produce a warning. - The proposal specifies the rules for determining this. - want to restict the range to what is representable ? (what we said before). Now the proposal says it is implementation dependent. - Gord prefers to specify required behavior instead of making it an error. Parameter values could be part of the reason for having a problem. Arturo - normal verilog truncation would give a range of 0 to 0. Gord - if bounds are exceeded - could restrict to the allowed range. Neil - prefers min,max to arbitrary semantics Gord - if all ranges are restricted to 32 bit. -5 to 50, 3 bit - unsized (get 0 to 7) coverpoint expression Arturo - 10-12 and 3-bit expression. - would be get 7, 7 Gord - that would be surprising to a user - for 0-7, 8-15, 16-... where expression is 3-bit (don't want to have other bins to go to 7-7) - prefers out-of-range bins to be empty bins. Arturo - first find the empty bins? Gord - partition the expressed bin range to those that are inside and outside the expressable range. Those that are inside are what we restrict ourselves to. Those that are outside are "gone" (empty bin). If a range is completely outside, it becomes an empty bin. Hard to express it in LRM, but the behavior would be natural to a user. Non-empty bins where any part of the range is in the allowed set of values. It is easier to express in general terms as opposed to LRM terms. Arturo - an error could be a runtime error. During covergroup construction is where the error could occur. Neil - doesn't want a runtime error... Prefers Gord's description of determining if a bin range is out of bounds and treating that as an empty bin. FM - suggested that a cast could be used. Gord - cast would only be useful for truncating assignments. Need to use normal math to describe. How specify max value of a type? cast does truncating assignments. Can add a couple of examples to the proposal. Ray - can we use $ as a range value (max value?) Gord - don't know where to use $, will think about it when redoing the proposal. AI/Gord - update proposal that will use min/max terminology and that outside of the range specifies an empty bin. AI/ ALL: to review and send any comments Randomization/Constraint related --------------------------------- 889 (Randomization)clarifications for resizing dynamic arrays (Doug) Issue - the colors of the proposal (red and blue) are not showing up properly for all browsers. We need to make sure the editor sees the colors. A pdf file would be best so as to avoid the different browser behavior. Ray: reference individual element, but the index expression, in addition to constant. Arturo: 'may include', may need more language to cover all areas. Ray: guard expression should cover the second bullet being striked. Gord: 'shall contain only'. AI/ - need to reword this section. "Shall contain only..." Ray: normal dynamic array, resize it. But for object handles, size constraint does not do the resize. reference to the size is state variable. if it does not match up it is an error/failure. Arturo: actual array is not resize, you allocate the max number. Gord: a size constraint, array of object handles, would that be through for non-dynamic arrays. Arturo: non-dynamic arrays there is no size member. the size of array would be a state variable. Ray - resizing dynamic arrays. If an array of handles the size isn't changed. Gord - doesn't like idea of having different behavior for arrays of different types (eg class types and when not). - what if we have a parameterized type. The behavior will change depending upon the type. - can't buy the argument that a size constraint is used to randomize the objects. Neil - agrees with Gord on this. Arturo - dynamic array of class objects. - future enhancement - would like to retain backward compatability Ray - we could make size constraints on dynamic arrays of handles. Gord - wants to have a way to extend things so that handles are not a special case. Can't create objects - doesn't know how to call the constructor. So it can't resize. Arturo - grow beyond existing size then have null handles? Ray - when resize an array, do existing elements go away? - what about rand mode bit? Is it with respect to the array or the element? Arturo - can specify rand mode for elements of an unpacked array. Gord - big question is what is the behavior of size constraint on array of object handles. Ray - could be: illegal, new behavior, state behavior, limit Arturo - or can't create now objects. - how could we iterate over a subset of an array? - users will want to randomize an array of objects. - In the example: size inside of a foreach is unorthodox Mehdi - has seen examples of this, but users want to typically reallocate the objects. AI/Ray - redo 889 Other issues: Neil: AC has given back mantis item 1325 back to sv-ec for review and vote. 6. Next Meeting: Monday June 5th, 2006, 11-1:00pm ==================================================================== ==================================================================== ================= Action Items ======================== Action items: May 22, 2006 ------------------------- AI: 1313 Gord - update proposal that will use min/max terminology and that outside of the range specifies an empty bin. AI: 1313 ALL members: to review and send any comments AI: 889 Ray - redo 889 proposal Action items: May 8, 2006 ------------------------- AI: 1256 Gord - will add some comments (bug notes) to mantis 1256. AI: 976 Dave - put a proper proposal in place AI: 960 Mehdi - discuss this with Matt to resolve the overlap. Action items: April 10, 2006 ----------------------------- AI: 1330 Dave, add the example list to do. AI: 261/262 combined Steven put together some examples of overflow -- Arturo unsigned/signed examples. AI: 'this' question from M. Burns, Dave: review and discuss with Gord and create a mantis item. (this as a default argument ) Action items: March 27 2006 ---------------------------- AI: 1306 Ray a bug note to this mantis item. may want to drop. Action items: March 13, 2006 ---------------------------- AI: new item - Gordon to create a new mantis item for randomize() method call item (Ray, Gordon have discussed - still working on it internally) **) List of all other submitted errata mantis items without proposal. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Francoise: ---------- - 802 assigning too many elements in the queue (Francoise) - 522 use of concatenation in 5.14.2 (Francoise) - 521 pattern assignment for queues (Francoise) - 520 example of queues assignment (Francoise) - 519 section 5.14,empty array literal syntax (Francoise) - 518 queues and arrays (Francoise) - 517 concatenation syntax usage section 5.14 (Francoise) - 511 related to section 12.25 (Francoise) - 1312 wait_order specification with repeated events (Franciose) Steven: -------- - 339 typos in queue methods 4.14.2 (Sharp) [Neil] - 412 5.14.1 queue operators (Sharp) - 564 Cross-program variable access (Sharp) - 553 Program block exit semantics (Sharp) - 551 Program block interaction with queues (Sharp) -. 549 Issues with Section 15 on Scheduling Semantics (Sharp) - 219 disable/return fork/join (assigned) (Sharp) - 1363 Behavior of join_any containing no statements is unclear (Sharp) - 1415 behavior of foreach with no loop variables not specified (Sharp) clarification - 1441 20.8 restriction on virtual interfaces in "sensitivity list" not defined (sharp) Shalom: ------ - 958 dynamic array size method (Shalom) [Neil] - 974 dynamic arrays/queues comparison (Shalom) - 975 related to 5.9, illegal for index_type (Shalom) - 976 5.9-5.10 clarifications (Shalom, DaveR) - 1038 array ordering methods (Shalom) - 1349 fork/join_none: what if parent thread terminates without blocking statement? - 1417 1.2 mentions queues twice (Shalom) (clarification) Dave: ----- - 885 syntax typo in description (queue) (DaveR) - 1384 bit stream cast and pack/unpack for protected./local members (DaveR,Neil) Ray: ---- - 1391 Invalid example code using 'process::self.srandom(100)' (Ray) - 1421 static method 'get_coverage' cannot have 'ref' arguments (Ray) Gord: ----- - 1256 description of linked list (annex D) (Brad) Gord) Brad: ---- - 968 list package (should be covered by 1256 sv-ec & 1412 sv-bc) (Brad) * 1427 dynamic_array_new (Brad) -- need a .pdf/.html format file from the text Mehdi: ----- - 346 usage of word string (from 275) (Mehdi) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- =================== Resolved Mantis items ============================= Resolved Mantis items (by dates) --------------------------------------------------------------- May 22, 2006 (state) --------------------------------------------------------------- 1279 approved unanimously --------------------------------------------------------------- May 8, 2006 (state) --------------------------------------------------------------- 884 approved Unanimously 1270 CLOSED covered by 978 1168 approved unanimously -------------------------------------------------------------------- April 10, 2006 (state) -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1308 approved with one abstain (Steven) 1416 approved with one abstain (Steven) Resolved Mantis items (by dates) -------------------------------------------------------------------- March 27, 2006 (state) -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1306 approved acknowledged 1315 approved acknowledged 1393 approved acknowledged 1357 approved acknowledged 247 Closed --> closed 270 remains as enhancement 134 reamins as enhancement -------------------------------------------------------------------- March 13, 2006 (state) -------------------------------------------------------------------- 714 approved assigned 892 approved assinged 1242 approved assigned [ one abstain] 1243 approved assigned 1244 approved assigned 1263 approved assinged Reviewed items from other committees 1325 SV-AC February 13, 2006 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 138 approved assigned enhancement 251 - no action - assigned enhancement 253 approved closed 1178 approved closed 1237 approved assigned 1239 approved assigned 1240 approved assigned January 9, 23 2006 items -------------------------------------------------------------------- 344 closed 644 closed 683 approved closed 712 approved closed 722 approved acknowledged 725 approved closed 1236 approved assinged 1238 merged with 1237 closed =======================================================================