[sv-cc] SV-CC Meeting minutes for 11/24/2004

From: Charles Dawson <chas@cadence.com>
Date: Tue Nov 30 2004 - 17:18:31 PST

Minutes of 11/24/2004 SV-CC Meeting.

ATTENDEES
000000000000
444444444444
111111110000
111100009999
211022102211
470360369250
xxxxxxxxxxxx Charles Dawson
xxxxxxxxxxxx Francoise Martinolle
xxxxxxxxxxxx Doug Warmke
xxxxxxxx-xxx Bassam Tabbara
-xxxxxxxxxxx Andrzej Litwiniuk
-xxxxxxxxxxx Joao Geada
xxxxxxxx-xxx Jim Vellenga
xxxxxxxxxxx- Ralph Duncan
-xxxxxx--x-- Rob Slater
xxxxxxxx-x-- Sachchidananda Patel
xxxxxxxxxx-- Michael Rohleder
-xxxxx-xxx-- John Stickley
xxxxxxxxx-x- Jim Garnett
xxxxxxxx--x- Steven Dovich
-xxxx-x-xxxx Ghassan Khoory
-----------x Swapnajit Mitra
-----------x Karen Pieper
---------x-- Angshuman Saha
-----x------ Kevin Cameron
---x-------- Amit Kohli
--x--------- Surrendra Dudani
x----------- Stu Sutherland

1. Reviewed Patent information.

   - Charles Dawson read the patent information.

2. Reviewed minutes of the 11/17/04 Meeting.

   - ?/?. Minutes accepted.

3. Liaisons

   - P1800 meeting

     Chas reported that the SV-CC committee has been given an additional 2 weeks
     to address issues that come up due to things approved by other committees
     at the last minute. P1800 also concluded that we are to continue to work
     on errata after 12/1, even though it will not make it in time for this version
     of the specification. Chas reported that all previously passed Items were
     accepted by P1800 with the exception of Item 50. Item 50's vote was
     postponed until sometime in the future because not all members were prepared
     to vote on it.

   - Encryption

     This committee is likely to drive last minute requirements onto SV-CC.

   - No other meetings were reported on.

4. New business

   - Items 41, 51, and 169

     Bassam asked that we discuss these issues and that Brad, Stu, and Francoise
     attend. Brad was not there, so discussion was postponed to the next meeting.

   - Required time prior to voting on an item

     We voted to modify our 7 day rule on needing a proposal prior to an official
     vote for this next week only. Instead 1 day is all that is required. This
     is due to the 12/1 deadline.

   - Issues

     It was suggested that if you have any objections to items, that you please try
     to bring them up via email prior to the meeting next week. Since we will be
     trying to get through all items at the meeting, this would speed things up.

   - Items 65, 58, 102, 201

     We had accepted these last week via straw polls. A friendly amendment to 201
     to change the terms "NULL" and "null byte" to "null character".
     JimV/Francoise. PASSED as amended.
     Doug will update Item 201.

     No further objections were raised, so Items 65, 58, and 102 PASSED (unanimous).

5. Reviewed of items with proposals.

   - Item 288 Use a proper typedef for 32-bit values instead of 'unsigned int'

     Friendly amendment to remove 27.1.2.2 and replace with uint_32_t.
     Steve/Doug. PASSED as amended (unanimous)
     Michael to update.

   - Item 295 Is "var bit typespec" superfluous in VPI?

     JimV/Ralph. PASSED (unanimous)

   - Item 301 Is every unpacked array a VPI array var?

     JimV will add new proposal based on discussion.

   - Item 284 Should taskfunc have multiple statements

     Should we have note 3? "may" should be "can".
     "is not" should be "greater than". JimV added new proposal based on
     discussion.
     JimV/Ralph. PASSED as amended (unanimous)

   - Item 282 VPI string value for reg vs. logic var

     This proposal contained changes that we made in other items. Chas was
     concerned that this would confuse the editor. JimV added a new
     proposal without these changes.
     JimG/Steve. PASSED as amended (unanimous)

   - Item 079 Clarify TRUE/true and FALSE/false values for VPI object model

     Steve/JimG. PASSED (unanimous)

   - Item 303 PTF 342: Deprecate the PLI 1.0 sections

     Stu had made a less drastic proposal: move them to an annex. Stu thought
     this would be more palatable to P1800 committee. Stu took an action to
     see if older versions of specification are still accessible through the
     IEEE. Stu noted that note 2 in Clause 20.1 should refer to "ACC" instead
     of "TF" and Clauses 21, 22, and 23. Also need a place holder for Clause 21.
     Steve/Michael. PASSED as amended (unanimous)
     Chas to update.

   - Item 299 typo: Memory should be memories

     Steve/JimV. PASSED (unanimous)

   - Item 300 typo: Memory should be memories, primitive should be primitives

     Steve/JimG. PASSED (unanimous)

   - Item 265 sv_vpi_user.h has redundancy

     Bassam moved that Items 66, 67, 69, 70, 264, and 266 be declared as
     duplicates of 265. Seconded by JimV. ACCEPTED.

     Francoise and Chas wanted another week to look at proposal. JimV felt
     that we had already had enough time. JimV thinks the proposal is much
     better than what is there, even though it may not be perfect.

     Michael motioned for a straw poll. Francoise opposed. Doug abstained.
     Straw poll ACCEPTED.

6. Old Business

   -

Meeting ended at 1:35pm (EST)

7. Action items

   SV-CC action items:
   - Francoise to ask Peter Ashenden what was done to improve
     printing from Rational Rose.
   - Francoise to inquire about the feasibility of third parties
     shipping the UML for the diagrams.
   - Joao/Francoise to file SV-BC item asking to define linearization.
   - Francoise to check with SV-BC on default return type of functions.
   - Chas to ask Karen about updating the diagrams (does not fit well
     with approved process).
   - Andrzej to make sure the LRM says that for the C layer of DPI,
     representations of a type are always the same regardless of where
     it is (packed struct, member of array, ...etc.).
   - Francoise and Bassam to reconcile sections 28 and 31.
   - Everyone to review outstanding items to make sure high priority ones
     are resolved prior to 12/1/2004
   - Doug to update Item 201.
   - Michael to update Item 288.
   - Chas to update Item 303.
   - Francoise and Chas to review Item 265's proposal.
   - Stu to see if older versions of IEEE standards are still available.

   PTF action items:
   - Steve to compare BNF with the access available
     for attributes to see if they match
   - Francoise to remove "+" from tags in UML diagrams and
     add vpi prefix where appropriate.
   - Francoise to send out HTML for 1364-2001 diagrams, using
     something other than JPG for importing diagrams into frame.
   - Stu to write proposal for PTF 368.
   - Francoise to write proposals for PTF 373, 374, and 396.
   - Steve to write proposals for PTF 311, and 495.
   - Sachi to write proposals for PTF 307, 312, and 313.
   - All to review Generates proposal from ETF committee.
   - Francoise, et all to review BTF generates proposal
     for the upcoming vote, with particular emphasis on
     how we will address generates in VPI.
   - Stu to enter new PTF item for save/restart/reset issue.
   - JimG to write proposals for PTF 517, 533, and 534.
   - Chas to write proposal for PTF 296.
   - Francoise to lookup wording for PTF 524 in VHPI.
   - Francoise will open a new PTF issue to look for situations like 25.6.15,
     where multiple methods are used access the same object enclosure
   - Chas to reword proposal for PTF 525.
   - Draft a straw man proposal using a clean slate with no concern for
     existing PLI/VPI on the best way to represent all Verilog and
     SystemVerilog kinds and types. This straw man will then be used as a
     basis for discussing backward compatibility with the existing reg, net,
     variables, functions, and parameter diagrams. It may be decided that
     full backward compatibility is not possible, or is not the best approach
     moving forward.
   - Sachi will file a PTF item for the clarification of what can be done
     at ROsync time and putting values in future times.
   - Francoise to file a PTF item that asks to specify the order that iteration
     occur in, when the order is important.
   - Steve to add ETF item for Annex C to remove the Informative label, but
     still allow the contents to be optional.

8. Items for consideration at the next meeting (they already have proposals):

   - Item 265 sv_vpi_user.h has redundancy
   - Item 313 PTF 296: Generate stmts will need change made in VPI
   - Item 307 PTF 530: 26.6.17: expr class does not contain vpiTchkTerm - should model different
   - Item 318 Utility fn to reveal if packed type actual form == canonical form
   - Item 309 PTF 622: Return value for left/right range of unsize parameter
   - Item 278 contradiction between example 3 in E.9.4 and specification for packed arrays embedded in aggregates
   - Item 301 Is every unpacked array a VPI array var?
   - Item 160 multiple packed array dimensions (E.6.6, E.10.1 differences)
   - Item 292 vpi_handle_by_multi_index return types
   - Item 293 Clean up vpiWaiting/Process typo
   - Item 289 In VPI model, "mod port" should be one word
   - Item 061 Meaning of vpiMultiArray depends on 1364 but is in conflict with it
   - Item 318 Utility fn to reveal if packed type actual form == canonical form
   - Item 049 Necessity of specifying import fn return type
   - Item 267 VPI model for randcase statements (section 12.15)

--
Charles Dawson
Senior Engineering Manager
NC-Verilog Team
Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
270 Billerica Road
Chelmsford, MA  01824
(978) 262 - 6273
chas@cadence.com
Received on Tue Nov 30 17:18:40 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 17:18:43 PST