================================================================================

IBIS INTERCONNECT TASK GROUP
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ibis.org_interconnect-5Fwip_&d=DwIGAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=DcQR-qLpQg5lIreuM6-NYECRIAFXt268PRNS5WO043M&m=v1gPPitAWZ9YNnrHfRScVIt0qnfNXqjNkRjB5bI35o4&s=z2kIdNrBT9FBCAAY8E936KPtub6rqrDbmvERVN6wRmo&e=  
Mailing list: ibis-interconnect@freelists.org 
Archives at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.freelists.org_archive_ibis-2Dinterconn_&d=DwIGAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=DcQR-qLpQg5lIreuM6-NYECRIAFXt268PRNS5WO043M&m=v1gPPitAWZ9YNnrHfRScVIt0qnfNXqjNkRjB5bI35o4&s=GyA8FiTQnd3qCficwAJ9MzNsm7NidQZ0NvcalHDc3Y8&e=  

================================================================================

Attendees from February 17, 2021 Meeting (* means attended at least using audio)

ANSYS                                Curtis Clark*
Intel Corp.                          Michael Mirmak*
Mentor, A Siemens Business           Arpad Muranyi*
Micron Technology                    Justin Butterfield*
                                     Randy Wolff*
SiSoft (MathWorks)                   Walter Katz*
Teraspeed Labs                       Bob Ross*
Zuken USA                            Lance Wang*


Michael Mirmak convened the meeting.  No patents were declared. 
Justin Butterfield took minutes.


Review of Minutes:
- Michael called for review of the minutes from the February 10, 2021 meeting.  
  Michael displayed the minutes.  Arpad Muranyi moved to approve the minutes.  
  Randy Wolff seconded.  The minutes were approved without objection.


Review of ARs:   
- Randy to add the EMD Part Selector proposal to the BIRD.
  - Randy suggested we may cancel this.

- Randy to come up with a practical example to show the hard-coded 
  configurations. 
  - Randy suggested we may also cancel this. 

- Bob Ross to come up with a pathological example.
  - Done.

  
Opens:
- None.


EMD Parts Selector Discussion:
Michael noted Randy had sent out a message that the EMD Parts Selector feature 
proposal is being withdrawn.  Randy stated it is taking more time than he 
would like.  The proposal adds significant complexity, and it will be 
difficult for EDA tools to implement.  He noted nothing is broken in EMD 
currently, and this is a nice to have feature.

Michael asked if we would consider adding this feature later.  Randy replied 
we would not be able to add the feature in this manner in the future.  Bob 
stated the options are to put it in now, to put in the hooks to add it later 
by adding the names for EMD Parts and Voltage List, or we could create new 
keywords later for the selection.  Randy commented we could have a name as a 
subparameter under a keyword and not change the keyword.  Bob stated we might 
need to add a column to the Parts List as an optional entry.  He noted that we 
have no solution to the complex selection mechanisms.  Michael stated it 
sounds like we will stick with the current BIRD.

Michael asked if we expect any issues with the EMD BIRD.  Arpad replied adding 
the names can be done, but it does not address the complexity issue.  He is 
not opposed to this, but he was not sure if this should be done.  

Arpad asked, regarding the pathological case Bob sent, if this was only a 
problem for EMD Parts Selector.  Even without the selector, we still have 
nested EMDs, and Bob's case was for nested EMDs in other directories.  Bob 
replied this is not a problem without a selector.  The problem is when you 
reference a file in a separate directory.  We also have a rule that the same 
EMD cannot be recursively referenced, and the parser can check this.  Michael 
stated, since the EMD Parts Selector is deferred to a later version, this 
would not be an issue.  

Bob stated the Parts List can reference the same EMD, and this could be a 
problem.  Michael asked if we need to change the rules, and if we need a test 
case for this to send to the parser developer.  Bob replied we need a check 
for this.  He thought there is a rule for this already.  Randy noted there is 
a rule that an EMD file cannot reference itself directly or indirectly.  Bob 
was not sure if the indirect case includes what he is concerned with.  

Michael asked if we see any reason why we would need to generate a BIRD202.3.  
He asked if we need to make any changes.  Randy replied we have a couple 
editorial changes, but we can mention these during the vote.  We can issue a 
BIRD202.3 after the vote.

Bob asked if the BIRD202.2 has been posted.  He has draft7.  Michael noted 
BIRD202.2 is posted on the IBIS website, while the draft7 is on the 
Interconnect page.  Randy had made minor editorial changes to BIRD202.2 on the 
IBIS website.  There are a couple additional editorial changes we would like 
to make.  Randy did not see a reason to delay the BIRD.  We could make a 
motion to vote on it in the IBIS Open Forum meeting this week with the 
editorial changes.  Bob agreed to this.  He noted we need to check the section 
and figure references.  Michael suggested these editorial checks are less 
relative for BIRDs.

Michael stated we do not have additional BIRD202.2 topics.  Arpad asked if we 
can start talking about Touchstone.  Michael stated we are expecting an 
Editorial meeting time slot on Friday at 9am PST.  We are planning to kick off 
the Editorial Task Group next week.  We could start talking about Touchstone 
again, but he would propose suspending the Interconnect Task Group while 
Editorial is going on.  Arpad asked how many Editorial meetings did it take in 
the past to finish the editorial process.  Michael replied the goal is to have 
IBIS 7.1 up for vote by DesignCon.  For IBIS 7.0, it took about 6 months.  
Randy noted we have some work on the AMI parameters to add the new parameters 
to the tables.  Bob stated the work includes all the tables, updating the 
hierarchy diagram, and updating example dates and versions.  Randy commented 
meeting on two Fridays might be enough to get started, but he suggested to 
use the Interconnect meeting time slot to make faster progress.  Michael 
stated we will have an official discussion on the meeting scheduling during 
Friday's IBIS Open Forum meeting. 

Michael asked if we need a motion to suspend the Interconnect Task Group.  Bob 
moved to suspend the Interconnect Task Group.  Arpad seconded the motion.  
There were no objections.

Arpad asked what is the processes for unsuspending the group.  Michael replied 
we can discuss in the IBIS Open Forum, and the email reflector is always open.


Next Meeting:
The next meeting will be TBD.


Bob moved to adjourn.  Randy seconded.  The meeting adjourned without 
objection.

================================================================================
Bin List:

IBIS-ISS Parser:
- IBIS-ISS parser scope document