I have thought about this and I will send out a description of my interpretation tomorrow morning. Francoise ' -----Original Message----- From: Jim Vellenga [mailto:vellenga] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 11:21 AM To: Francoise Martinolle Cc: sv-cc@eda.org Subject: RE: [sv-cc] uploaded proposals for 465 and 528 My problem is that I still don't really know what a frame is. According to our current VPI diagrams, you can get to a frame from -- a named event (vpiWaitingProcesses iteration) -- a thread (one-to-one) -- another frame (parent/child) -- a class var (vpiWaitingProcesses iteration) But that in itself does not tell me what frame is. The non-VPI parts of the 1800 LRM talk about threads (10.7) but not about frames. A thread is either -- an initial statement -- an always statement -- a parallel statement in one of the fork/join constructs -- a dynamic process, or -- a continuous assignment So can we tell what a frame is by comparing it to the corresponding thread? Our diagrams show a one-to-one relationship, both ways, between threads and frames. I think that that must mean (zero or one)-to-(zero-or-one), actually. For example, the LRM definition of a thread doesn't mention a task call or function call, while a frame can represent each separate task or function call, especially if the calls are recursive. So there is not a true mathematical one-to-one correspondence between frames and threads. OK, so lets look at the diagram for frames. Can we use it to find the process that a frame corresponds to? If a frame represents the following always statement: always @trig rega = regb; where trig is a named event, then the statement represents a process waiting on @trig. How does one find the always statement associated with the frame? An unnamed always statement without a "begin" in it is not a scope. Those are some of the problems I've run across so far. It looks to me like we need a clear statement of what a frame is and what it corresponds to in the SystemVerilog language. Is it dynamic -- i.e., can it disappear -- and under what circumstances? Since the rest of the LRM doesn't discuss frames, we need to define them much more clearly in our section. 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 Francoise Martinolle ] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 12:08 AM ] To: sv-cc@eda.org ] Subject: [sv-cc] uploaded proposals for 465 and 528 ] ] 465: better description of vpiWaitingProcesses ] ] 528: fixes to the classes information model. ] ]Received on Thu Apr 14 21:06:21 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Apr 14 2005 - 21:06:40 PDT