RE: [sv-cc] [Fwd: Issue 50: Action Item]

Overall, the new proposal for Issue 50 solves most of the problems that
the older proposal was design for. Since I will likely be late for the
Champions meeting, here are some comments for the rest of the SV-CC
team to consider:

1) While the introductory material states that "the functions/types
marked DEPRECATED in this proposal need not be present in a compliant
implementation of the P1800 standard", the revised proposal does not so
state. A statement to this effect should be added to the beginning of
Annex E.

2) The revised section E.6.7 says that "The prior type svLogicVec32
representation exists, but is deprecated in this standard." Since a
conforming implementation is not required to support the alternate
implementation, it would be better to say that "The prior type
svLogicVec32 representation _may_ exist, ...."

3) Annex E and Annex F should both state that the standard permits, but
does not require, the include files to declare the deprecated
constructs.

4) Annex F should be updated to reflect the new definitions.

5) The change to E.9.2 has to be coordinated with the change that the
SV-CC approved for Issue #278. Is the merging of these changes clear
to the editor?

Regards,
Jim Vellenga

---------------------------------------------------------
James H. Vellenga 978-262-6381
Engineering Director (FAX) 978-262-6636
Cadence Design Systems, Inc. vellenga@cadence.com
270 Billerica Rd
Chelmsford, MA 01824-4179
"We all work with partial information."
----------------------------------------------------------
  
 

] -----Original Message-----
] From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On
] Behalf Of Charlie Dawson
] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:58 AM
] To: SV-CC
] Cc: Karen Pieper
] Subject: [sv-cc] [Fwd: Issue 50: Action Item]
]
] Hi All,
]
] Karen has asked that we consider this alternative proposal
] for Item 50.
] The Champions will be discussing tomorrow and may make a
] recommendation
] that we consider it. If you want input into their discussion, we have
] been invited to join them. Please see below.
]
] -Chas
]
]
] -------- Original Message --------
] Subject: Issue 50: Action Item
] Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:26:01 -0800
] From: Karen Pieper <Karen.Pieper@synopsys.com>
] To: sv-champions@eda.org
] CC: chas
]
]
]
] Hi, Champions,
]
] At the last P1800 meeting, Oz Levia was given the action item
] (from the
] unapproved minutes):
]
] Action Request [Oz Levia]: On 3 December 2005, Oz is to send out an
] impact analysis and come up with possible non-obtrusive suggestions to
] resolve issue 50.
]
] The P1800 has asked that the Champions review Oz's findings and make a
] recommendation, for example, the Champions can indicate that the SV-CC
] should review the proposal. Please review the following email and the
] attached proposal so that we can discuss it as the first
] issue discussed
] in the Champions meeting on Tuesday.
]
] I have cc'ed Charles Dawson on this mail, and will discuss
] with him the
] possibility of inviting members of the SV-CC to our champions meeting
] for this discussion.
]
] Charles, here is the meeting info:
]
] SV Champions Meeting December 7 from 10am to 12 noon Pacific
] time. The
] callin information is:
] PARTICIPANT CODE: 53904
] Toll Free Dial In Number: (888)635-9997
] International Access/Caller Paid Dial In Number: (763)315-6815
]
]
] Thanks,
]
] Karen
]
]
] > From: "Oz Levia" <ozlevia@synopsys.COM>
] > To: "'Srouji, Johny'" <johny.srouji@intel.com>
] > Cc: "'Brophy, Dennis'" <dennisb@model.com>,
] > "'Karen Pieper'" <pieper@synopsys.COM>,
] > "'Oz Levia'" <ozlevia@synopsys.COM>
] > Subject: Issue 50: Action Item
] > Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:09:40 -0800
] > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626
] > Importance: Normal
] >
] > Johny,
] >
] >
] >
] > As agreed I would like to provide this follow up on my
] action item
] > from the last P1800 meeting regarding issue 50. I copy
] Dennis so this
] > can be recorded and Karen so that she can forward to the
] Champions and
] > the Chairs of CC in advance of Monday s meeting.
] >
] >
] >
] > We have spoken to over two dozen customers that have known use of
] > legacy bit representation (aka Vec32) that is documented in
] > SystemVerilog 3.1 and 3.1a. Time did not permit the negotiation of
] > release of names or projects. To a limited extent I can do so
] > verbally. The concern from customers is that old code will work
] > differently in 3.1 or 3.1a vs. P1800 without a way for the user to
] > tell. The code will link but will not produce correct results. In
] > other words the change is insidious.
] >
] >
] >
] > Overall, we propose to retain the alignment between DPI
] and VPI and
] > retain of the resolution on issue 50 (as resolved by CC), but would
] > suggest a modification that will strengthen the alignment
] and at the
] > same time resolve customer concerns about back ward compatibility.
] >
] >
] >
] > The proposal is attached, but in short it can be summarized:
] >
] >
] >
] > * A user call will be added that will return the
] version of SV
] > being implemented by the simulator. This is generally useful.
] >
] > * DPI data type (with the 3.1(a) byte / bit order)
] and function
] > will remain as is and will remain compatible with 3.1 and 3.1a, but
] > will be deprecated in P1800 version of the standard. Old code will
] > continue to link and work as before, but implementations
] will not be
] > required to support this Interface going forward. Traditionally,
] > deprecation is used for exactly that purpose. Over time, deprecated
] > portions can be removed from the standard.
] >
] > * VPI data type will be used with similarly named (new)
] > functions. This will achieve perfect alignment with VPI
] and DPI since
] > hence forward they will use the same data type. No confusion can be
] > claimed.
] >
] > * That it&
] >
] >
] >
] > Please see attachment.
] >
] >
] >
] > -Oz.
] >
] >
] >
] >
]
]
] --
] 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 Mon Dec 6 13:56:03 2004