Minutes of Weekly Meeting, 2017-05-08

Meeting called to order: 11:08 AM EDT

1. Roll Call

Ian McIntosh
Brad Van Treuren
Brian Erickson

By Proxy:
Peter Horwood

Excused:
Bill Eklow
Heiko Ehrenberg
Carl Walker


2. Review and approve previous minutes:

  • Approval of May 01 minutes (draft circulated on 05/01/2017)
    • Brian moved to approve, seconded by Brad. No objections or abstentions.

3. Review old action items

  • All: do we feel SJTAG is requiring a new test language to obtain the information needed for diagnostics or is STAPL/SVF sufficient? See also Gunnar's presentation, in particular the new information he'd be looking for in a test language (http://files.sjtag.org/Ericsson-Nov2006/STAPL-Ideas.pdf)
  • Ian: Add the previously discussed lists to the 'master' template. Ongoing.
    • Some sections need further expansion that may take time to develop.

4. Reminders

  • Consider Adam's three points (from the action from the first weekly meeting) and suggest what is preventing us from answering those questions:
    • Establish consensus on goals and constraints
    • What are we trying to achieve?
    • What restrictions are we faced with?
  • Forum thread for discussion: http://forums.sjtag.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=172
  • Possible invitation for Al Crouch to talk about Parallel SIBs.
  • Python Netlists (SKIDL) suggested by Brad for discussion.

5. Discussion Topics

a. Building Blocks - Use Case of a simple Interconnect Test - Continued, Implications for tooling.

  • Due to the light attendance it was felt that it would be difficult to make much progress on the headlined topic. Ian felt the subject needed the participation of the tool vendors, and also noted that Adam had seemingly not been able to join any calls recently; his views would probably be valuable.
  • Brad reported that 1687.1 were struggling with where re-targeting needed to take place. He and Michele had argued that it wasn't enough to have canned vectors for testing at a board level, although it may suffice for device level test, and gave examples such as SERDES requiring interaction between devices or thermal sensors where the test needed to be able to interpret "real values" and act according to the measurement.
  • [Peter, by email]
    • We should cater for canned tests and the re-targetting from one UUT to another at a minimum.
    • The concept of having the system generate vectors completely from input data burdens the system with cost/performance implications along with the associated time for "building/generating" the tests, this may be applicable in some cases but should be optional.
  • Brad also commented on an interesting presentation from Jeff Rearick in which he derived primitives, much as we had done, and proposed that "these are just scan operations, and we can that from the PDL". He showed a way of mapping from the instruments to the I2C registers using a combination of ICL, PDL-1 and some PDL-0.
  • There being little other progress to be made, Ian wrapped up the meeting and proposed to carry the agenda over to the next call.

6. Topic for next meeting

  • Building Blocks - Use Case of a simple Interconnect Test - continuation.
    • Pick over the pseudo code written today to consider what it implies for tooling.

7. Key Takeaway for today's meeting

  • None.

8. Glossary terms from this meeting

  • Carried over:
    • Definition of "interchangeability" required.
    • 'Instance' (or a more specific version of the term) may require definition in future.
    • 'Master through Slave Mode'
    • 'Master to Master Mode'
    • Need a refined definition of "system" for the purposes of the PAR.
    • 'Priority' - may relate to 'frequency' and 'urgency' in distinct definitions.

9. Schedule next meeting

  • Next meeting May 15.
  • May schedule:
    • 22, 29.
    • May 29 is Memorial Day in the US and a UK holiday, Ian will be out, so probably no meeting that week.

10. Any other business

  • Ian hopes Michele will be able to provide a fuller report on the TESTA tutorial in due course.

11. Review new action items

  • None.

12. Adjourn

  • Brian moved to adjourn, seconded by Brad.
  • Meeting adjourned at 11:23 AM EDT

Respectfully submitted,
Ian McIntosh