Minutes of Weekly Meeting, 2007-12-03

Participants:

Adam Ley
Ian McIntosh
Brad Van Treuren
Jim Webster (joined later)

Meeting was called to order at 8:10am EST

1. Roll Call (See list above)

2. Review of meeting minutes for 11/26/2007

With only 3 on the call it was not felt enough were present to approve of the minutes

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)
  • Provide feedback of more use cases not yet identified to Brad (All)
  • Review tables (Goals vs. use case matrix) on slides 38-41; (All)
  • Register on new SJTAG web site (http://www.mcintoshuk.plus.com/sjtag/) (All)
  • All need to check and add any missing Doc's to the site (All)
  • Send URLs of existing IEEE sites to Ian as references for SJTAG static web site (Brad) [done]
  • Respond to Brad and Ian with suggestions for static web site structure (Brad suggests we model the site after an existing IEEE web site to ease migration of tooling later) (All)

4. SJTAG Email reflector

Overview postponed since Carl Walker did not attend

5. Discussion Topics

  1. Discussion on web site structure (Ian)
    • Ian adding officer and core members lists to web site
    • Adam and Brad feel the web site is shaping up nicely and that the forum is going to be a useful tool once everyone gets comfortable with it
    • Ian reiterated that keeping it simple is the best policy. The importance is the content over appearance.
    • Nice job, Ian!
    • Adam, Ian, and Brad: We need to come up with a scope and purpose for the ATCA meetings we are holding. It is nice to discuss the technical issues, but we need to clearly state what the purpose of our efforts will produce.
  2. Meeting times.
    • Ian put together a table based on people's responses
    • Results of responses is that Monday morning has the most votes
    • To accommodate those not able to join on Monday meetings, we decided to hold one meeting a month on a Wednesday morning that will be decided later
  3. Revisit Adam's question about: "What are we trying to achieve?"
    • Adam: What would be useful as an outsider using ATCA is, what value do we need to try to deliver to satisfy the needs of ATCA for the module, users, etc.?
    • Brad: Most important is the use case document. Next is the Value Proposition that demonstrates why people should invest in SJTAG for their ATCA systems.
    • Adam: We still need to get to a higher level. What's the primary value proposition?
    • Adam: The Use Case document comes in at the mid-level. Our use cases show what you can do, but does not show the real value. We should strive to put value in some term of return on investment (ROI).
    • Adam: The use case is the what and how. The WHY is what is critical!
    • Jim: It is not the test people that have to be convinced. It is the people with the money that have to be convinced.
    • Jim: It's the "bean counters" that have to be satisfied. Is there a way to get their perspective?
    • Ian: Can we get their attention and participation?
    • Brad: Timothy Pender's paper at BTW2003 does a nice job of showing ROI for using SJTAG features for FPGA remote update. This has been important information to our people that run the project.
    • Brad: The "bean counters" may be too short term focused. There was a recent article in Embedded Systems magazine that described how accountants are focused on the short term savings because they usually move to a different company in 2-3 years. They want to look good for their savings and not their long term impact.
    • Jim: We need to talk with product/project managers. It is easy to convince the test engineers they need SJTAG.
    • Ian: People are becoming more cognoscente of full life issues in a product.
    • Jim: Criteria for diagnostics are different at system level then at board level.
    • Jim: We might want to do a brain storming about the why and talk with our internal people to look at the common areas.
    • Brad: Remote update savings, like Tim Pender's, is not enough to justify the cost of SJTAG in a system.
    • Jim: Not all sectors of industry support updates (e.g. military)
    • Ian: My company has a program ramping up for remote update
    • Brad: Why? The answer is "it depends".
    • Adam: We should start with the ATCA industry as the basis for exploration since it is a fairly narrow target market; then move out from there.
    • Brad: Should we show alternatives to our use cases?
    • Adam: Yes! It would be valuable.
    • Ian: It would certainly help for use cases that are hard to quantify.
    • Brad: What are the use cases that are hard to quantify?
    • Jim: Software Debug! - Not a valid use case in my book
    • Brad: I feel the ability to get state information out of a processor that is hung is extremely important from a system test perspective. Only the ARM processor, that I am aware of, is able to actually do this to some extent. The other processor interfaces require a reset to be done before debug mode will work. This loses the very state information we are trying to view.
    • Brad: POST - Each product has a variety of different bells and whistles it wants for this.
    • Jim: Each product also has different POST time budgets
    • Brad: The time to operation requirement for telecom is typically 10 seconds
    • Brad: POST is what drives the need for localized embedded JTAG access (versus global/multi-drop access)
    • Brad: Backplane access from off-board is still needed in a system when the local resources are not responding
    • Brad: Need to end the meeting, but let's put an action item for investigating the alternatives to our use cases for next week.

6. Next meeting

Scheduled for 12/10/2007 at 8:00am EST

7. Review new action items

8. No other business identified.

Meeting adjourned at 9:10am EST

Many thanks to Adam for supplying his notes to assist in recording the meeting.

Respectfully submitted,
Brad