Minutes of Weekly Meeting, 2013-10-07

Meeting called to order: 11:05 AM EDT

1. Roll Call

Ian McIntosh
Michele Portolan
Patrick Au
Peter Horwood
Heiko Ehrenberg
Brian Erickson
Brad Van Treuren (joined 11:06)
Eric Cormack (joined 11:15)
Tim Pender (joined (11:35)

Excused:
Carl Walker
Adam Ley


2. Review and approve previous minutes:

9/30/2013:

  • Draft circulated 9/30/2013.
  • No corrections noted.
  • Insufficient attendees to vote on approval.

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)
  • Harrison will attempt to come up with a table of use cases and their associated layer and what can be done at that layer. Ongoing.
  • Ian/All: Look for real world examples of boards that we could take through from board test to a system test implementation as a worked example case. Ongoing.
  • 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


5. Discussion Topics

a. Go/NoGo Structural Test of AC Coupled Links
    Go/NoGo Instrumented Test with Loopback at One End
    Go/NoGo Instrumented Test with One Device Tx and One Device Rx
    - Continue with above: Complete the first and do as much as we can with the other two.  Review what we've accomplished.

  • The three current templates were shared:
    http://wiki.sjtag.org/index.php?title=Go/NoGo_Structural_Test_of_AC_Coupled_Links
    http://wiki.sjtag.org/index.php?title=Go/NoGo_Instrumented_Test_of_AC_Coupled_Links_with_Loopback_at_One_End
    http://wiki.sjtag.org/index.php?title=Go/NoGo_Instrumented_Test_of_AC_Coupled_Links_with_One_Device_Tx_and_One_Device_Rx
  • Following notes record side discussions during the course of populating the unfilled fields of the three templates.
  • ASSUMPTIONS
    • AC Coupled Links: Brad suggested that this should include an assumption that any debug ports would not conflict with the boundary scan access.  Ian thought this was already covered by the note on compliance pins but Brad     pointed out that there may be external logic that is used to connect up a debug port.  Ian agreed that the diagram did not consider the existence of any kind of debug header or routing logic.  Brad noted that this was a SJTAG issue - ensuring that the *board* state (rather than just the chip state) is correctly configured for our intended use.
    • One Device Tx and One Device Rx (also Loopback at One End): Need to assume that instruments are provided and are accessible and controllable via the 1149.7 port.
  • CONSEQUENCES
    • One Device Tx and One Device Rx (also Loopback at One End): Where RX and Tx are on different devices, diagnostics can go to a single lane but with the loopback it can only go to a pair of lanes.
    • Brad suggested adding a clause to the loopback template to note that better diagnostics might be obtained if the loopback could return over multiple, optional lanes.  Ian wasn't sure that fitted as it seemed like it was proposing a different option to the topology.  Brad agreed it may be better as a new template.  The current template was renamed to state clearly that it applied to a *single* loopback.
  • SIMILAR DESCRIPTIONS
    • The single loopback and multiple loopback templates will be 'similar' {Ian will add this offline as time was running out}.
  • SIBLING DESCRIPTIONS
    • The single loopback and the Rx and Tx at either end templates should be siblings {Ian will add this offline as time was running out}.
    • A new template will be cloned from the single loopback to provide a basis of the multiple loopback case.

6. Key Takeaway for today's meeting

  • Single loopback and multiple loopback cases require separate templates.

 
7. Schedule next meeting

  • Next Meeting:
    October 14 - Brad may need to miss this meeting.
  • October schedule:
    14, 21, 28.


8. Any other business

  • There was no further news on BTW proposals.
  • Newsletter: Ian reminded the group it was due this month.  Brad felt that the templates might have produced enough to be worth an article.  Next meeting would likely review progress on the templates.
  • P1687 ballot is due to close on Friday, so any comments/votes need to be lodged in the next few days.
  • Ian had been evaluating moving the SJTAG website into a Content Management System (CMS).  This actually proved to be quite easy and only the 2012 and 2013 minutes still need to be ported.  Brad and Heiko had provided some feedback on layout.
    {'Staging' site shared}
    Ian briefly described the site layout, apologising for the poor rendering in his IT-crippled Internet Explorer 8, and recommended that people try the site themselves in almost any other browser.  Heiko asked for confirmation that the forum and wiki were not being moved into the new format.  Ian said they would remain as they are in their own subdomains.  Tim asked if new logins would be required.  Ian replied that only the forums and wiki had required logins previously and they were not changing.  There would be new logins for the new site for 'authors'.
  • Brad suggested that as a few people might be getting involved with 1149.10 we may want to table an item for next meeting to try to resolve the scheduling conflict.

9. Review new action items

None.

10. Adjourn

Eric moved to adjourn at 12:11 PM EDT, seconded by Brad.

Respectfully submitted,
Ian McIntosh