Minutes of P2654 Working Group Meeting No.72, 2020-07-13

Meeting called to order: 11:06 AM EDT

The slide references relate to the pack used during this meeting, located here: http://files.sjtag.org/P2654WG/P2654_Meeting_72.pdf

1. Roll Call

Ian McIntosh (Leonardo)
Terry Duepner (National Instruments)
Heiko Ehrenberg (GOEPEL Electronics)
Brian Erickson (JTAG Technologies)
Peter Horwood (Digital Development Consultants Ltd)
Bill Huynh (Marvell Inc.)
Jon Stewart (Dell)
Louis Ungar (A.T.E. Solutions)
Brad Van Treuren (VT Enterprises Consulting Services)
Carl Walker (Cisco Systems)


By email (non-attendees):

Eric Cormack (DFT Solutions)
Joel Irby (AMD)
Richard Pistor (Curtiss-Wright)
Jan Schat (NXP Semiconductors)

2. Agenda

  • Brad moved to accept the agenda, seconded by Terry, no objections.

3. IEEE Patent Slides

  • {Slides 5-10}
  • Patent and Copyright slides reviewed. 

4. Review and Approve Previous Minutes

  • {Slide 11}
  • Meeting #71, June 29 (updated draft circulated July 1)
    • No further corrections advised.
    • Brad moved to approve, Terry seconded, no objections or abstentions → minutes approved.

5. Review Open Action Items

6. Inter-group Collaboration

  • {Slide 13}
  • From TTSC meeting:
    • Vote taken to accept and pass request to NesCom for two-year extension for P1687.1. Justification in part is to better align with P2654.
    • A PAR is to be raised to keep 1149.4 active.
    • For 1450.x standards due to expire 2021 and 1581 there will be email votes on extending these.
    • The question on use of Master/Slave terminology within standards is being passed to IEEE. Work is ongoing to assess the extent of current usage within TTSC sponsored standards. 

7. Discussion Topics

7 a) Definitions from forum

  • {Slide 14}
  • Previously discussed:
    • Callback; AccessLink, Access Point, Access Interface.
  • Component:
    • 'Component', like 'device' and 'chip' is inherently ambiguous.  Probably needs a particular context in order to define it.  Do we know what context we might use it in P2654? - probably not yet.
    • Could extend into 'software component'.
    • Previous discussions suggested that we might wish to avoid using the term.
    • 1687 used component as an element within a 1687 network, but further exploration suggests that the definitions within the standard might be circular.
    • Does P2654 need to consider components or would sub-assemblies be adequate?
    • Should P2654 consider 'all systems' or just multi-board systems? Single-board systems could presumably be tested using conventional methods.  Sub-assemblies (definition from Oxford Languages dictionary (online) cited) would be appropriate for multi-board systems.
    • How should we deal with FPGAs? They could represent the function of a number of 'components' and may include hard and/or soft processing cores.  FPGAs may need to be a special case as their function is alterable (although likely to be static for any given test case).
    • Perhaps better to write the standard and then produce definitions to suit. However, we probably need some "baseline" idea to use while writing the standard in order to maintain consistency.
    • Further notes on slide 55 of the meeting pack.
  • Device:
    • Has many of the same issues as 'component'.
    • Are we only interested in active components?  Passives in the data paths used by P2654 might be largely insignificant, but important as part of the testable target, e.g. if the system or UUT contains a filter.
    • Further notes on slide 56.
  • Hierarchy:
    • This is another term that needs to be qualified for the context where it is used, although the general meaning of hierarchy is fairly well understood.
    • A hierarchy for control may be quite different from the physical, structural hierarchy of a system.
    • Do we have "control" defined?
      • Controller is defined, but not 'control'.
      • Control may exists at multiple levels, so while there is conventionally a top-down (or left-to-right) flow, there can be delegation or negotiated transfer of control.
    • Further notes recorded on slide 56.

7 b) Diagrams for Standard

  • Absorbed into 7a) but not discussed during this meeting.

8. Any Other Business

  • {Slide 15}
  • None.

9. Today's Key Takeaways

  • None.  

10. Glossary Terms from This Meeting

  • None.
  • Carried over:
    • System Element.
    • System Resource.
    • 'System' needs the concept of a controller capability added.
    • "Filtering" may need to be defined.
    • "Translation" may need to be defined.
    • "Interface" is missing.
      • No obvious IEEE accepted definition.
      • 1687 has definitions for specialised forms: Device Interface and Instrument Interface.
      • We may need specialised forms for Software Interface and Hardware Interface.
      • "Interface" is overloaded and requires disambiguation.
    • 1687.1: Transformation.
    • IEEE 1856: Sense - "Sensor" done, Acquire, Analyze not really defined.
    • Device - do we mean a packaged device? May be many devices in a package. "Device" is often used as a modifier, e.g. "device package", "device identification".
    • Use Case Context, Application Context
    • Legacy Infrastructure, SJTAG Infrastructure (placeholders for now, really for working group to define).
    • "Generators": May need to be qualified as "Test Generators" (used by the integrator/tester) and "Model Generators" (used by IP providers, interface designers, etc.).
    • AccessLink and DataLink descriptions will need to be revised.
    • See P1687.1's definitions on Slide 31 of the pack presented by Jeff Rearick on Jan 14, 2019.
    • "State", "Vector", "Sequence" and "Pattern" as proposed at April 8, 2019 meeting.
    • "Event", "Access Interface" as proposed at April 15, 2019 meeting.
    • 'Port' needs to be developed.

11. Schedule next meeting

  • July 20, 2020.
    • Louis will be out, possibly Eric.

12. Topic for next meeting

  • Continue from today:
  • a) Definitions from forums
  • b) Diagrams for Standard

13. Reminders

  • None.

14. List New Action Items

  • None.

15. Adjourn

  • Terry moved to adjourn, seconded by Peter.
  • Meeting adjourned at 11:59 AM EDT

Respectfully submitted,
Ian McIntosh