1) At the end of the proposal there is the addition of "effort_limit" to table 19-1 (Instance Specific Coverage options).
My general impression is that this is more of a vendor option. However, if it is specified in the LRM the limit should specify an effort number (rather than "number of CPU seconds) where the interpretation of the number is vendor specific. The tie to "CPU seconds" is problematic, (still will vary between vendors, but now will vary depending CPU to CPU). Does this need to be specified for each covergroup instance?
2) There is also an addition of "study" to table 19-3 -- Coverage group type (static) options. This feels even more like a vendor option (optimization).
Ray Ryan
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Mon May 9 10:43:48 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 09 2011 - 10:43:51 PDT