Minutes of Weekly Meeting, 2008-10-06
Meeting called to order at 8:20am EDT
1. Roll Call
Brad Van Treuren
Adam Ley
Peter Horwood
Ian McIntosh
Carl Nielsen
Carl Walker
Eric Cormack
Heiko Ehrenberg
Tim Pender (joined at 8:43am EDT)
2. Review and approve 9/15/2008 minutes
minutes approved (moved by Ian, seconded by Eric)
3. Review old action items
- Adam proposed we cover the following at the next meeting:
- Establish consensus on goals and constraints
- What are we trying to achieve?
- What restrictions are we faced with?
- Establish whether TRST needs to be addressed as requirements in the ATCA
specification if it is not going to be managed globally (All)
- Adam review ATCA standard document for FRU's states
- Brad to contact Rohit regarding IEEE policy for interviews.
- Brad contact Gunnar for some reference source code
- Brad contact Rohit to find out what is available for access at Fringe Meeting.
- Brad: contacted Rohit; phones or network connection will NOT be available
- Adam: I think there is wireless connection available for a fee
- Brad to assemble discussion on ITC poster session
- Brad and Ian worked on the layout of the poster
- Ian worked on the brochure and published the A4 and US letter versions
on the web site
4. Discussion Topics
- Status and review of white paper sections
- Section 1: no changes / updates
- Section 2: no changes / updates
- Section 3: no additions / changes
- Language Section: no changes / updates
- Poster Session Preparation/Suggestions
- Complete discussion of STAPL++
(Gunnar's STAPL++ at http://files.sjtag.org/Ericsson-Nov2006/STAPL-Ideas.pdf;
Brad's feedback to Gunnar was captured in http://files.sjtag.org/Ericsson-Nov2006/STAPLppFeedback.doc
- [Brad] any further discussion on this?
- [Ian] It may be helpful to clarify the differences in purpose of HSDL
and STAPL++. HSDL and STAPL++ are serving very different applications.
HSDL provides a description of the structure. STAPL++ shows how to package
the vectors. It may provide a way to portability for pregenerated tests.
There still needs to be a way of describing the structure of the circuit.
- {Tim Pender joined}
- [Brad] Re there any other comments on the STAPL++ discussion? The big
thing was the concept of concurrency (last few slides in Gunnar's
presentation).
- [Ian] Concurrency may not be useful to everyone and may be questioned as
to why we need it.
- [Brad] For people with MBIST and LBIST, it is very important. No one
thought when dot one was created with the RUNBIST instruction that there
would be more than one MBIST or LBIST blocks in a design. That has changed
and makes the RUNBIST useless.
- [Ian] What is difficult is predicting what the requirements are going
to be in the future.
- [Carl W.] True, but we can use the past as an indicator so we don’t
run into the same kind of scaling issues.
- Scope and Purpose Follow-up
- submission of IEEE PAR postponed (see section 6 "other business" below)
- [Brad] visit SJTAG Wiki, lower right has a link to scope and purpose
- Voting on Scope and Purpose:
- Approval of proposed Scope:
SCOPE
This standard will develop a methodology for access to test, debug,
instrument, configuration and/or programming, and emulation features (but not
the features themselves) of devices via the IEEE 1149.1 Test Access Port (TAP)
for the board and system (multiple board) domains.
The elements for this methodology include a description language(s) describing
the structure of how various standards (e.g., 1149.4, 1149.6, 1532, P1687, P1581)
and other access mechanisms leverage the IEEE 1149.1 defined TAP interface in
the system; a description of data representation formats for test vectors,
diagnostic analysis, and data logging; and a software application programming
interfaces (APIs) defining command primitives facilitating communications between
functional command, control, and data modules of an SJTAG Test Manager application.
- Heiko moved to accept, Ian seconded; unanimously accepted
- Approval of proposed Purpose:
PURPOSE
The purpose of the SJTAG standard is to provide an extension of the
IEEE 1149.1 standard specifically aimed at enabling the configuration, control,
management, and representation of the communications required at the hierarchical
system and board levels to perform operations on the IEEE 1149.1 Test Access Port
(TAP) of one or more devices or device cores, in a uniform and transportable way
across all system modules.
- Eric moved to accept, Heiko seconded; unanimously accepted
- Additional descriptive text for "Need for the Project" section of the PAR:
is currently no defined, independent standard for this test technology.
Each vendor is free in the way of implementing test hardware and software
functionality on their boards. Without an independent standard, testability at the
system level is reduced or impossible making the test technology in the system less
useful for users integrating designs from multiple sources limiting the ability to
use the test technology in other facets of a product’s life cycle beyond
manufacturing. In practice, the software used to perform test actions is written
in an ad-hoc manner across the industry to access the IEEE 1149.1 features of the
devices installed on the various boards of a system. Further, communications between
remote and embedded hosts managing the tests applied to the system under test is
non-existent or implemented using ad-hoc communications protocols.
5. Schedule next meeting
Monday, October 13th, 2008, 8:15am EDT
Wednesday, October 22nd, 2008, 8:15am EDT
Fringe Meeting at ITC Thursday, October 30th, 10:30-12:30 PDT.
Monday, November 10th, 2008, 8:15am EST
Monday, November 17th, 2008, 8:15am EST
Wednesday, November 26th, 2008, 8:15am EST
6. Any other business
- Brad's future with Alcatel-Lucent is uncertain; chances are
that Brad may not be able to continue his involvement in any
SJTAG standardization efforts going forward. Therefore, we need
to identify any people who are interested in and able to lead the
efforts, in particular Chair and Vice Chair; Brad will continue
to work through ITC;
- the group agrees to table the submission of an IEEE PAR until
candidates for Chair and Vice Chair are identified
- call to action: volunteers for leadership positions step forward!
- Tim’s inquiry about DDR2. All agree there are ways this can be
done with boundary-scan and many of the commercial tooling supports
this. Some have responded back to Tim regarding specific questions.
Brad shared he is presenting a paper this year at ITC discussing the
memory test issues and why boundary-scan does not work all the time.
Regarding the refresh mode that Tim was asking about, the Precharge
feature for DDR2 was talked and how it is able to refresh/recharge an
entire row of memory during the access cycle which is special circuit
inside the DDR2 that allows slower boundary-scan tests to be able to
be applied.
7. Review new action items
none
8. Adjourn
meeting adjourned at 9:13 am EDT (moved by Ian, seconded by Eric)
Many thanks to Heiko in helping take notes for the 10/6 meeting.
Regards,
Brad