[sv-cc] Re: [sv-ac] SV-AC and SV-BC collaboration mode (resent)

Hi Dmitry:

Here are more:

. 2237 VPI additions for 1667
. 2246 VPI definitions of assertkill need modifications

J.H.

> X-eda.org-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205377927.02657@fq5TySdVy4uuqHKJ4RJvEA
> X-Authentication-Warning: server.eda.org: majordom set sender to owner-sv-ac@eda.org using -f
> X-eda.org-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205377877.08279@av6KPuvTRBVxEuWrWpF0uw
> X-ExtLoop1: 1
> X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,454,1199692800"; 
>    d="scan'208,217";a="529503498"
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 05:11:07 +0200
> X-MS-Has-Attach: 
> X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
> Thread-Topic: SV-AC and SV-BC collaboration mode (resent)
> Thread-Index: Ach+Xb59fkvXm1V+TWmArs6+H9UM6w==
> From: "Korchemny, Dmitry" <dmitry.korchemny@intel.com>
> Cc: <sv-cc@eda-stds.org>, <sv-ac@eda.org>
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Mar 2008 03:11:13.0437 (UTC) FILETIME=[BC040CD0:01C87F37]
> X-eda.org-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
> X-Spam-Status: No, No
> Sender: owner-sv-ac@eda.org
> X-eda.org-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
> X-MailScanner-ID: m263C68D019859
> X-eda.org-MailScanner-From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org
> 
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> 
> ------_=_NextPart_001_01C87F37.B985B059
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> I am resending this message to add several missing proposals to the
> list.
> 
> =20
> 
> ---
> 
> =20
> 
> Hi Charles,
> 
> =20
> 
> I would like to elaborate the coordination mode between SV-AC and SV-CC
> for working on the VPI related SV-AC proposals. I suggest that the
> proposal owners work closely with SV-CC on their proposals and attend
> SV-AC meetings when their proposals are discussed.
> 
> =20
> 
> In case the SV-CC bandwidth does not allow operative handling of all the
> SV-AC proposals, would it be possible to identify the SV-CC volunteers
> to review the proposals before they are officially reviewed by SV-CC?
> 
> =20
> 
> Could you, please, provide the time line of handling the SV-AC proposals
> and the schedule of their discussion, in order to allow the proposal
> owners to attend relevant discussions, and to work on their proposals
> with SV-CC?
> 
> =20
> 
> Here is the list of the VPI-related SV-AC proposals:
> 
> =20
> 
> . 1503 27.33 VPI diagram of propertyinst has no vpiArgument (Bassam
> Tabarra)
> 
> . 1599 API and VPI changes for 0805 (Bassam Tabarra)
> 
> . 1757 accept_on/reject_on (Doron Bustan)
> 
> . 1898 Explicit mappings from assertion system tasks to callbacks
> (Bassam Tabarra)
> 
> . 2005 Glitches with immediate assertions (Erik Seligman)
> 
> . 2100 Synchronous aborts (Yaniv Fais)
> 
> . 2182 VPI diagrams for checkers (Erik Seligman)
> 
> . 2173 Add case construct for properties (Yaniv Fais)
> 
> . 2250 VPI changes for LTL operators(Erik Seligman)
> 
> =20
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dmitry
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Israel (74) Limited
> 
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
> 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.