Subject: Minutes of meeting, 9/3/2002
From: Joao Geada (joao@jurassic.synopsys.com)
Date: Mon Sep 09 2002 - 14:35:59 PDT
NOTE:
Next meeting schedule to be sent out by Yatin
SV-CC (09/03/2002)
****************************************************************
Minutes of last meeting 08/06
Attendees:
[xxx-x] Ghassan Khoory (Synopsys, Co-Chair)
[xxx-x] Kevin Cameron (NSC)
[xxx-x] Simon Davidmann (Co-Design)
[xx-xx] Peter Flake (Co-Design)
[xxxxx] Joao Geada (Synopsys)
[x----] Tayung Liu (Novas)
[xxxxx] Andrzej Litwiniuk (Synopsys)
[x----] Mike McNamara (Verisity)
[xxx--] Stuart Swan (Cadence)
[--xx-] Francoise Martinole (Cadence)
[-xxxx] Bassam Tabbara (Novas)
[--xxx] Yatin Trivedi (ASIC Group)
[--xx-] Michael Rohleder (Motorola)
[--x--] Darryl Parham(Sun)
[---x-] Alain Reynaud
------------------------
At start of meeting Yatin presented an overview of the SV meeting that will
occur
on Sept 17. This is being arranged by Vassilious and various emails have
been forwarded
to the lists with details.
A question was asked (forget who) as to whether a phone conference will be
available
for those who can't make it in person.
ACTION ITEM: Yatin: to contact Vassilious and determine whether such a
facility will be
available and contact the list with the required information
As this SV occurs on a Tuesday and therefore conflicts with our regular
SV-CC meetings,
the next meeting will be postponed and will now occur, this once, on
Wednesday, Sept 18
ACTION ITEM: Ghassan: make any necessary changes to the phone conference
arrangements and
communicate the access numbers to the list.
Yatin also mentioned that each SV committee, including SV-CC, will be making
a presentation
at the Front To Back Conference (Nov 11-13, Santa Clara, CA.
www.edaf2b.com). The presentations
will describe status and activities of each of the committees.
Yatim proposed acceptance of the minutes of the meeting 8/20/02
Approved unanimously.
We then went over the action items from last meeting:
Actions 1, 4, 7:
Assigned to: Yatin
Summary: collecting requirements documents and comments and putting
into common location)
Status: common location created, DirectC requirements collated &
published.
Global, assertion and coverage requirements not completed,
to be done by this Friday (8/6/02)
Action 2:
Assigned to: Francoise
Summary: checking on status of Cadence possible donations & reporting
to group
Status: open
Actions 3, 9: discuss and reach concensus on object vs source code
compatibility global requirement
Assigned to: Michael (leading the discussion)
Status: discussion has taken place and has concluded that object code
compatibility is the
requirement. Closed.
Action 5: define scope of assertion API (simulation API vs all tools API)
Assigned to: Joao
During the meeting it was established that this is an important part
of the API
that can be considered as an extension to the immediate requirement
for SV 3.1
Status: closed
Action 6: define scope of coverage API (simulation API vs sim+database API)
Assigned to: Joao/Ghassan
During the meeting it was established that this is important to
consider but should
be thought as an extension also
Status: closed
Action 8: provide VPI requirements
Assigned to: Francoise
Status: open
Action 10: Having Co-Design provide additional requirements for DFLI API
Assigned to: Simon/Peter
Status: open
Action 11: issues of user-defined types and how these manifest themselves in
the API.
Assigned to: Kevin (this action item was not previously assigned to
anybody)
Status: open
Some discussion took place in the meeting and this action was
narrowed to specifically
address only types across the DFLI interface, as apposed to being
applicable to all APIs.
At the conclusion of the action item review Yatin then described the
timetable and
plans for the next meeting. The goal continues to be to have our portion of
the SV standard
complete by February, at which time all the documents from all the
committees will be
brought together into the Accellera SV standard. This will then be presented
to DesignCon
(early March) and will then wend its way into the IEEE standardization
process.
This implies that we have approximately 8 more meetings to completion of our
process.
Yatin proposes that we use the next 3 meetings to complete and approve all
the requirements,
then use these approved requiremts to judge the donations. There can be 3
outcomes to
this judgement:
a) complete. Donation accepted and incorporated into standard
b) partial. Donation does not conflict with requirements, but is
incomplete
Will require us to fill in the holes in the donation
c) not accepted: Donation does not satisfy requirements
Will require us to invent what will be necessary to satisfy
requirements
Action item: Yatin: send schedule of what requirements will be reviewed and
voted
at which meetings, so that we can prepare ahead of time.
Action item: ALL: review, discuss and resolve any issues with the
requirements prior
to the meeting in which approval for that set of requirements occurs.
Joao proposed that the first requirement to be reviewed be the global
requirements,
as all others depend on that. All concurred.
============================================================================
==
Joao Geada, PhD Sr. Staff R&D Engineer Verif Tech
Group
Synopsys, Inc TEL: (508)
263-8083
154 Crane Meadow Road, Suite 300, FAX: (508)
263-8069
Marlboro, MA 01752, USA
============================================================================
==
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Sep 09 2002 - 22:11:14 PDT