Work through the issues in the D03-resolution document.
DF1: We discussed the proposed concept of putting all tester channel
mapping information inside the double quoted string. The format of the
string content would be defined by the ATE or tool that is consuming the
data. This has much flexibility and can support the identified needs of
multi-site channel maps, package vs. probe channel maps, multiple ATE channel
maps. This concept is consistent with the Pragma block for defining tester
specific data. We also considered defining new syntax for defining the
Final decision was to use the double quoted string.
TT1: We discussed the use of the Resource and R statement as a mechanism
for indexing into the data content of a Pragma block. This allows for the
linkage between the STIL data and the ATE specific data to be defined while
still allowing complete flexibility as to how the ATE resorce content is
defined - i.e., it could be in native ATE language.
Group agreed to this syntax.
RK1: The suggestion to remove the Category and NameChecks from the TRC block was rejected. However, the reason for the suggestion was agreed to be a valid one - i.e., it is anticipated that different ATE systems would be defined in separate TRC files. The reason for keeping these statement is: 1) they are optional and therefor don't force complexity, and 2) having these statements allows for combining multiple rule sets when needed.
RK2: The suggested changes to the Signals block were accepted.
RK3: The suggestion to restrict where integer_expr can be used was rejected. The group felt it unwise to totally disallow expressions as we cannot anticipate all the different architectures that may exist. It was decided that this of restriction should be included in a "recommended usage" document (similar to the one we are already working on for 1450.1).
FM2: A new issues by Frances - suggesting to move Site and Port out
of the Pattern block. This led to a big discussion with regard to the purpose
and scope of 1450.3 and in particular all the ways that TRC fits in to
the usage model in figure 1. There was not clarity on how all these application
fit together and whether the syntax can be clear for each usage. For example:
Site and Port may make sense when defining the resources of an ATE system,
but not when reporting the statistics of a pattern.
Tony took the action item to define the usage and flows implicit in figure 1. Then we will discuss further.
DF2: Dan brought up a new request to have suntax defining the status of a tester targeting operation. The idea is to have a new block type called "Violation" that defines any resource problems that occurred when mapping to a given target tester.
FM1: We discussed the format of the tutorial that Frances is preparing. Should have several parts to it:
1. basic STIL file to use as test case (i.e., signals, groups, pat burst, etc)
2. set of TRC rules for a (fictional?) ATE system
3. result of applying the TRC rule (2) to STIL file (1)
4. resultant STIL file with targeting data included.
5. simple usage of variables for fluid parameters
Agenda for next meeting:
Continue working throuth the issues list.
Friday, Feb 1, 2002, 1:15pm to 3:00pm PST.