Subject: Re: Actions from 19th Committee Meeting 3/18/02
From: Shalom Bresticker (Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com)
Date: Tue Mar 19 2002 - 21:31:20 PST
"No task" I understand, why "no function" ?
1364-2001 has a problem because function execution is not atomic.
Shalom
Peter Flake wrote:
>> > Page 40 - Issues related to scheduling semantics discussion. Compatibility
>> > issues with Verilog2K1. Also issues getting this through IEEE 1364 committee.
>> > Action: Peter Consider this further given the need to make this straight
>> > forward for the IEEE1364 committee.
>>
>>
>> We can probably limit the requirement to ensuring that execution of a single statement (not a block) containing no user task or
>> function call is uninterrupted. This allows atomic test-and-set using assignment operators in an if statement.
>
> Proposed new wording:
>
> SystemVerilog creates a thread of execution for each initial or always block, for each parallel statement in a fork/join block and
> for each dynamic process. Each continuous assignment may also be considered its own thread. Execution of each thread may be
> interrupted between statements at a semicolon, but a single statement (not a block) containing no user task or function call is
> uninterrupted. This allows atomic test-and-set using assignment operators in an if statement.
-- Shalom Bresticker Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com Principal Staff Engineer Tel: +972 9 9522268 Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd. Fax: +972 9 9522890 POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL Cell: +972 50 441478
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Mar 19 2002 - 21:32:29 PST