[sv-ec] More comments on mantis 890 (part 1)

Hi Doug,

I have the following comments on mantis 890 version 8 (part 1).

Page 2, section 15.10

- The note at the bottom of the changes to this section is redundant.
  The text at the bottom of the second blue paragraph on this page discusses
  this already.

  I think that this note should be removed.

Page 2, section 15.12

- The note was changed in version 8 of the proposal.

  "NOTE - When the clocking block event is triggered by the execution of a
   program, there is a potential race between the update of a clocking block
   input value and programs that read that value without synchronizing with
   the corresponding clocking event."

   The following text was added: "... without synchronizing with the
   corresponding clocking event."

   Can't a race occur even if the synchronization is taking place?

Page 3, section 15.14, first blue paragraph

- "For zero skew clocking block outputs with no cycle delay, synchronous
   drives shall schedule new values in the Re-NBA region of the current time
   slot."

   This isn't always true. As mentioned in the previous paragraph "the
   corresponding signal changes value at the indicated clocking event".
   The statement which performs the synchronous drive may not be executing in
   the time slot where the clocking event occurred. So this statement about
   scheduling in the current time slot is not always true. The synchronous
   drive may need to be scheduled in the time slot corresponding to the next
   clocking event.

page 4, section 15.14, second paragraph

- The first part of this paragraph has changes from the LRM, which are no
  longer in blue.

  For some reason, the first set of changes to this paragraph are no longer
  in blue. Version 7 of the proposal looks correct, version 8 seems to have
  some blue text shown in black.

  "...value after the ## in the cycle_delay production..."  should be blue?
  And the corresponding text being replaced should show up with red cross outs.


Page 6, section 15.14.2, next to the last blue paragraph

- Typo

  "If a synchronous drive and a procedural assignment write to the same
   variable in the same time, the writes shall take place in an arbitrary
   order."

  This text had a problem in version 7 of the proposal, it was updated in
  version 8, but it still isn't quite right.

  From:
     in the same time, the
  To:
     in the same time slot, the

Neil

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.