Phone Conference P1450.1 Working Doc Subgroup

Thurs June 19, 10:00 am PDT

 

Attendees:

Bruce Kaufmann

Greg Maston (chair and scribe)

Peter Wohl

 

Documents

 

 

Agenda

 

1. Pattern data - see above link to for-review-on-6.19.03.pdf

2. Lockstep - see above link to for-review-on-6.19.03.pdf

3. Fail data feedback - status report

4. Review open issues in review-resolution doc - see above link

 


Meeting discussion

 

Proposal for a Working Group Extension

Greg briefly presented his justification for an extension - to allow

the WG time to resolve the remaining issues without generating the

perception that this effort is being pushed through too fast. Also, to

allow ballot resolution without falling into a nebulous area of "PAR

expired, ballot is iterating". This was generally excepted but Peter's

objections, which were voiced later, are mentioned below.

 

Pattern Extensions (clause 18 changes in stuff for discussion)

Bruce raised two specific questions:

(1) concern about returning a 'blank' for the error condition. Greg

identified that the intent here was to cause some sort of

WFC-miscounting/misalignment as a final error condition in this

situation. The application was more than able to generate ADDITIONAL

errors, but that this situation is also a reliable error condition and

vector processing should not continue in this situation.

 

Bruce then requested an example be added, demonstrating the ability to

check for a ' ' value in the situation where perhaps this condition

was expected. Greg generated the following example to add to the

examples. NOTE: this example needs to be reviewed, because Greg

doesn't know how to compare against the undefined WFC either.

 

(2) Bruce questioned what the last-WFC should be if a '#' was assigned

to a Signal. Greg identified that the last substituted value of that

signal ought to be the value returned, not '#' because technically

'#' is not a WFC.

 

Bruce requested this be clarified and an example demonstrating this

behavior added as well. Greg defined the following example and text

for review, Tony to add for next review [AI1 and AI2].

 

example addition -

Procedures {

   "var_ex" {

       C { SIG1 = #; }

       If '\W SIG1 ==  ' { V { SIG1=B; SIG2=C; } }

       Else {              V { SIG2=\W SIG1; }}

   }

}

 

note in this example, that the value returned from '\W SIG1' in the If

expression will be the WFC assigned to this signal from the '#'

operation -- not the value '#'. The If test identifies that if there was no

assignment to SIG1 in the call, then set the value of SIG1 to B. If there was

an assignment then set SIG2 to the same value.

 

Pattern PAT {

....

Call "var_ex";         // no value passed to SIG1

Call "var_ex"{SIG1=A;} // both SIG1 and SIG2 are assigned WFC A.

....

 

LockStep

Greg briefly reviewed the concept identified in the review document,

to remove the semantic elaborations in sections 13.3 and 13.4, and

present the LockStep attribute definition only. These elaborations are

implementation details that are outside the scope of this document and

identify strategies for supporting LockStep but are not intended to be

constraints on the definition. Hence the proposal to remove these

elaborations. Tony to implement requested changes. [AI3].

 

How To Push Forward

Peter identified the desire to bring this effort to closure, and

voiced concern over the proposal to get an extension. The members

discussed:

   - implementing the lockstep changes and closing this issue.

   - push for fail feedback resolution and failing that, close this

   issue.

   - hold a face-to-face meeting to resolve any remaining issues, most

   likely in CA since most members are available with notice to attend

   a meeting there, [AI4] for Tony.

 

Meeting adjourned at 10:45 PST.


Post meeting discussions

 

After the WG meeting, Greg and Tony had further discussion on the issues.

These points are presented here and will be brought up at the next meeting.

 

returning a 'blank' for error - We decided and will propose at the

next wg meeting that the (currently unused) character '~' be returned for an

error condition. This makes the reporting and testing for an error state explicit.

 

fail feedback issue - This has been an AI (for Jason) for over 1 year

now. It is still felt by many of the wg to be an important need of STIL.

At this time, however, now that the STIL extensions have become

better defined, it seems like this feature would better fit into the STIL.3

standard - tester targeting. This needs further discussion and would

require an adjustment to the scope. STIL.1 scope currently contains the

following sentence -

"Define structures in STIL to relate fail information from device testing

environments back to original stimulus and design data elements."

 


Next meeting

Next phone meeting July 3.

 

AIs

[AI-1] Bruce - contact Jason on fail feedback.

[AI-2] Greg - generate examples requested above.

[AI-3] Tony - add examples to document.

[AI-4] Tony - implement LockStep description reduction.

[AI-5] Tony - consider scheduling face-to-face to close these issues.