Minutes of Study Group Meeting, 2018-06-11

Meeting called to order: 11:05 AM EDT

The slide references relate to the pack used during this meeting, located here: http://files.sjtag.org/StudyGroup/SG_Meeting_38.pdf

Brad moved to accept the agenda as proposed, seconded by Jon.

1. Roll Call

Ian McIntosh (Leonardo MW Ltd.)
Eric Cormack (DFT Solutions)
Bill Eklow (Retired)
Brian Erickson (JTAG Technologies)
Peter Horwood (Firecron Ltd.) (joined 11:30)
Bill Huynh (Marvell Inc.)
Jon Stewart (Dell)
Brad Van Treuren (Nokia)
Carl Walker (Cisco Systems)
Russell Shannon (NAVAIR Lakehurst)
Louis Ungar (ATE Solutions)
Sivakumar Vijayakumar (Keysight)

By email (non-attendees):
---

Excused:
Terry Duepner (National Instruments)
Joel Irby (ARM)

2. IEEE Patent Slides

  • {Slides 5-9}
  • Patent slides reviewed, no comments.

3. Review and Approve Previous Minutes

  • {Slide 10}
  • June 4 (updated draft circulated June 7)
    • No further corrections noted.
    • Brian moved to approve, Brad seconded.
    • No objections or abstentions → minutes approved.

4. Review Open Action Items

  • {Slide 11}
  • [21.1] Brad: Supply Ian with glossary definitions used by 1687.1 for "transformation" and "retargeting".
    • No updates.
    • ONGOING.
  • [27.2] Legacy Initiative Group to propose definition for "SJTAG".
    • No updates.
    • ONGOING
  • These may need to be carried over to a future Working Group.

5. Discussion Topics

a) Review feedback on Scope, Purpose and Need.

  • {Slides 12, 13, 14, 15}
  • Review of forum activity (posts starting from http://forums.sjtag.org/viewtopic.php?p=1358#p1358).
  • Brad opened new slides and captured comments from the meeting:
    • Scope: Minor re-wordings to improve readability.
    • Purpose: The providers of the descriptions need not only be the producers of ICs and PCAs. Need to allow others and to include intermediate level assemblies and things like SoCs. Noted (not directly for this text) that it is not possible to mandate that, e.g., an IC will include STAM, although it could be written into a requirement specification.
    • Need: No changes required.

b) Identify "Stakeholders" for the standard.

  • List of stakeholders created based on technology areas that are likely to have a need to interact with the proposed standard. After reviewing the example text that goes with the PAR form it was felt that the expectation may be for a higher level, industrial domain perspective, so a second list was created for that. Ian will discuss with Heiko and consult with the sponsor to determine what is preferred.

c) Voting process and motions.

  • {Slide 16}
  • Process was briefly described. Voting will be by email.
  • Brad moved that the group adopts the text of the Scope, as revised at this meeting, for the STAM PAR, seconded by Eric.
  • Bill Eklow moved that the group adopts the text of the Purpose, as revised at this meeting, for the STAM PAR, seconded by Brad.
  • Louis moved that the group adopts the text of the Need, as written at the previous meeting, for the STAM PAR, seconded by Jon.
  • Formal invitation to vote, including the motions above and the email address to sent votes to, will be sent out to the group as soon as possible after the meeting.
  • Modified slides created by Brad are available here: http://files.sjtag.org/StudyGroup/SG_Meeting_38_bgvt.pdf.

6. Today's Key Takeaways

  • {Slide 17}
  • Motions raised to adopt texts.

7. Glossary Terms from This Meeting

  • Check if we have an entry for "ATPG", add if missing.
  • Carried over:
    • "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.
    • 1687.1: Transformation, Retargetting.
    • IEEE 1856: Sense - "Sensor" done, Acquire, Analyze not really defined.
    • SJTAG: Discussion on forums - http://forums.sjtag.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=782
    • Device - do we mean a packaged device? May be many devices in a package (1149.1 opted for "entity" in order to be non-specific).
      • Correction to the above remark: It has been pointed out that 1149.1 actually defines conformance in terms of "component" (c.f. COMPONENT_CONFORMANCE attribute in BSDL), and "entity" only pertains to BSDL where it is simply inherited from VHDL. "Device" is often used as a modifier, e.g. "device package", "device identification".

8. Topic for next meeting

  • Review voting results.
  • Update of "Stakeholders".

9. Schedule next meeting

  • June 18.

10. Reminders

11. Any Other Business

  • None.

12. List New Action Items

  • None.

13. Adjourn

  • Eric moved to adjourn, seconded by Louis.
  • Meeting adjourned at 12:04 PM EDT

Respectfully submitted,
Ian McIntosh