RE: [sv-cc] P1364 meeting minutes and email ballot

I think Cliff and I agree on what needs to be done to clean up my initial
proposal for #687.  I will send out a revised version shortly.  Actually,
two revised versions, one based on #680 passing, and one without #680.

Regarding Cliff's side comment:

"> As the proposal stands, interfaces, programs and packages 
> cannot be surrounded with keyword directives. It occurs to me 
> that the same is true for configurations and we may want to 
> include each of these design elements in configurations, too. 
> Comments?

I agree that the P1800 LRM needs a clause or subclause that enhances
configurations to include the SV design elements.  That should be part of
the proposal for #680.  It is a bit of a hassle for the editor when one
Mantis number specifies changes to both LRMs, but I would rather that
changes that truly affect both standards be documented in one Mantis item.
As long as the change proposal is clear as to where changes are to be
applied, the editor--and reviewers of the editing--will get it right.  Of
course, what I would really have preferred is one standard and one LRM,
rather than two :(

Stu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stuart Sutherland
stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
+1-503-692-0898
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-etf@boyd.com [mailto:owner-etf@boyd.com] On 
> Behalf Of Clifford E. Cummings
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 8:36 AM
> To: btf@boyd.com; etf@boyd.com; sv-champions@eda.org; sv-cc@eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-cc] P1364 meeting minutes and email ballot
> 
> Hi, All -
> 
> Corrections, follow-up and additional comments below.
> 
> At 11:15 PM 5/3/2005, you wrote:
> >I appreciate Cliff's comments on my proposal for #687.  It 
> is good to 
> >know that someone actually read it.  However, I disagree 
> with many of 
> >Cliff's comments.
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >Cliff wants to change:
> >
> >  "The 'begin_keywords and 'end_keywords directives can only be 
> >specified outside of a module or primitive."
> >
> >to
> >
> >"The 'begin_keywords and 'end_keywords directives can only 
> be specified 
> >outside of a design element (module, macromodule, primitive or 
> >configuration)."
> >
> >First, throughout the 1364 (and 1800) LRM, where module is 
> mentioned, 
> >the keyword macromodule is inferred as also being mentioned. 
>  There is 
> >no need to make an exception in this one place and mention both 
> >keywords.  Second, Cliff is adding configurations as a 
> "design unit".  
> >I do not believe either the 1364-2001 or the P1364-2005 ballot draft 
> >say that configurations are design units.  That is why 
> configurations 
> >were not listed in the already approved version of these 
> directives in 
> >the P1800 ballot draft.  If configurations are design units, 
> then I agree they should be listed here.
> >If it is the unapproved Mantis #680 proposal that makes 
> configurations 
> >design units, then it is the responsibility of that proposal should 
> >revise this proposal.  It would be inappropriate to make the change 
> >here based on the assumption that #680 will pass.  If it should not 
> >pass, that would make this proposal incorrect.
> 
> Design elements are currently defined in P1364-2006-Draft 6, 
> in section 13.1.1. You are right that macromodules are not 
> included (I thought they were - I will drop macromodule from 
> my configurations proposal, too), but configurations are 
> included, and they should be included for the `begin_keywords 
> directives.
> 
> >------------------------------------
> >Cliff wants to change:
> >
> >P1365-1995 to 1364-1995
> >P1365-2001 to 1364-2001
> >P1365-2005 to 1364-2005
> >P1800-2005 to 1800-2005
> >
> >I agree that P1364-1995 and P1364-2001 should be changed.  Those are 
> >true typos in the current draft of the proposal.  However, the IEEE 
> >reviewers of the P1800 draft prior to the ballot draft explicitly 
> >stated that all references to the proposed 1364-2005 and 1800-2005 
> >needed to be preceded by "P" before we could go to ballot.  
> Supposedly, 
> >the IEEE editors (not the working group editors) do a search for 
> >"P1364" and "P1800" after the voting is completed and approved, and 
> >replace them with "1364" and "1800".  This is the same time the IEEE 
> >adds their copyright info, ISBN numbers, and such.  I will confess, 
> >though, that I worry about the IEEE editors getting the version name 
> >changes in this clause correct.  I am more than willing to 
> remove the 
> >"P" "P1364-2005" and "P1800-2005" in this proposal, and hope 
> that it is not red-flagged by the IEEE in the recirculation ballot.
> 
> I was confused because the examples all drop the "P" from the 
> comments. I guess the argument is that the examples are 
> informative so they can be technically inaccurate (but will 
> actually be accurate in the released
> specification) (?)
> 
> >------------------------------------
> >Cliff wants to change the keywords
> >cell
> >config
> >endconfig
> >
> >To:
> >cellname
> >configuration
> >endconfiguration
> >
> >These keywords changes are based on the as-yet-unapproved 
> proposal for 
> >Mantis #680.  I stated in my e-mail announcing this proposal 
> that any 
> >keyword changes specified in #680 would need to include necessary 
> >modification to this proposal, P1364 Annex B, and P1800 Annex B (and 
> >P1800 26-4, if this proposal is not approved).  I do not 
> believe it is 
> >appropriate to modify the keywords this proposal from what 
> is currently 
> >in 1364-2001.  I think #680 needs to modify all places 
> affected by any 
> >keyword changes caused by #680, including any changes to the 
> new clauses created by this proposal.
> 
> We should pass Mantis #680 first (if it is going to pass) so 
> we can include the corrections in Mantis #687 without 
> introducing a passed proposal that will need further Mantis 
> corrections. I have pointed out where the changes will be needed.
> 
> >------------------------------------
> >Cliff wants to change
> >"SystemVerilog extends the 'begin_keywords and 'end_keywords 
> defined in 
> >the
> >P1364-2005 standard..."
> >
> >To:
> >
> >"SystemVerilog extends the 'begin_keywords and 'end_keywords 
> defined in 
> >the
> >1800-2005 Standard..."
> >
> >I disagree with this change.  This proposal moves the 
> definition of the 
> >directives from P1800 to P1364.  This means that SystemVerilog IS 
> >extending the P1364 definition of these directives.  
> SystemVerilog IS 
> >NOT extending it's own definition of the directives.
> 
> My mistake, I thought this was a typo.
> 
> >------------------------------------
> >Cliff has a comment/question:
> >
> >"The ballot copy of the P1800-2005 had the following 
> paragraph, which 
> >has apparently been removed.
> >
> >"The 'begin_keywords and 'end_keywords directives can only 
> be specified 
> >outside of a module, primitive, interface, program or package. The 
> >'begin_keywords directive affects all modules, primitives, 
> interfaces, 
> >programs or packages that follow the directive, even across 
> source code 
> >file boundaries, until the matching 'end_keywords directive is 
> >encountered.
> >
> >"The P1364-2005 ballot draft specifies the legal design 
> elements. Are 
> >we not going to list legal SystemVerilog design elements (including 
> >configurations) in the P1800-2005 standard?"
> >
> >The proposal is to move the definition of these directives 
> from P1800 
> >to P1364.  It is not possible to list the SV design units of 
> interface, 
> >program and package in the P1364 standard, which is why they were 
> >removed from the proposal.  I have no objection modifying 
> the proposal 
> >for the new text in the P1800 standard to say that the 
> directives include these SV design units.
> 
> As the proposal stands, interfaces, programs and packages 
> cannot be surrounded with keyword directives. It occurs to me 
> that the same is true for configurations and we may want to 
> include each of these design elements in configurations, too. 
> Comments?
> 
> Regards - Cliff
> 
> >-------------------------------------
> >
> >Stu
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >Stuart Sutherland
> >stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
> >+1-503-692-0898
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Cliff Cummings - Sunburst Design, Inc.
> 14314 SW Allen Blvd., PMB 501, Beaverton, OR 97005
> Phone: 503-641-8446 / FAX: 503-641-8486
> cliffc@sunburst-design.com / www.sunburst-design.com Expert 
> Verilog, SystemVerilog, Synthesis and Verification Training
> 
> 
> 
>