1 / 13

BIRD100: A Series of Package Choices

BIRD100: A Series of Package Choices. Michael Mirmak Intel Corp. Chair, EIA IBIS Open Forum. Status. Creation of BIRD100 has hit a wall Intended to define IBIS-ICM link syntax What the draft BIRD100 includes today “instance_name” -- a subparameter of [Pin]

Download Presentation

BIRD100: A Series of Package Choices

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. BIRD100:A Series of Package Choices Michael Mirmak Intel Corp. Chair, EIA IBIS Open Forum

  2. Status • Creation of BIRD100 has hit a wall • Intended to define IBIS-ICM link syntax • What the draft BIRD100 includes today • “instance_name” -- a subparameter of [Pin] • Permits multiple [Model]s on one pin, and multiple pins tied to a single [Model] instance • “Pad” – a subparameter of [Pin Numbers] • Permits traditional [Package Model] constructs to connect to multiple [Model]s • Notes on ICM Naming Convention • A set of instructions on properly naming ICM nodes to map to [Model] and [External Model] connection points

  3. The Problem • IBIS ambiguities force choices for ICM linking • Need definitive statements on the application of and relationships between several keywords • [Pin Mapping] and package models • POWER and GND [Pin]s and package models • Package models and [Pin]s / [Model]s • Additionally… • For what IBIS constructs should ICM be available? • For what IBIS constructs should traditional packages be available? • Interactions to check • IBIS buffer construct (native, [E. Model], [E. Circuit]) • Pin modeling of power/ground ([Pin] uses POWER or not?) • [Pin Mapping] (used or not?) • Package model type ([Package], [Package Model], ICM, R_pin, etc.) • BIRD100 constructs (instance_name used or not?) • 96 different combinations in all

  4. Key Questions • BIRD100 as written is incomplete • Not all IBIS 4.1 Fig. 12 cases addressed • The following slides ask key questions which must be answered to complete BIRD100 • Answers to these questions will impact how BIRD95, AMS are implemented • These may also affect tools currently implementing [Pin Mapping] and other package keywords • Keep in mind potential EMI and non-PC applications (JEITA requests)

  5. Figure 12 (top)

  6. Figure 12 (bottom)

  7. Q1: [Pin Mapping] • [Pin Mapping] • What is the relationship between [Pin Mapping] and package models ([Package], [Package Model], R_pin)? • Where are [Pin Mapping] connections made? • At the buffer rail? (option a below) • If so, packages “sit” between [Pin Mapping] busses and pins • At the pin, with ideal shorts? (option b below) • If so, packages “sit” between [Pin Mapping] busses and individual buffer rails • R_pin makes less sense in this version • May we assume [Circuit Call] prohibits [Pin Mapping]? • For just the affected pins? • For the entire component? • Will instance_name work with [Pin Mapping]? We cannot avoid a choice here

  8. (a) [Pin Mapping] as On-die • Package model associated with pins • [Pin Mapping] is between packages and buffers [Package], [Pin] [Pin Mapping] [Package Model] A2 (POWER) pullup_ref Digital Port A1 pulldown_ref A3 (GND)

  9. (b) [Pin Mapping] as Pin Shorts Digital Port • [Pin Mapping] shorts pins together Pkg A2 (POWER) pullup_ref Pkg A1 A5 (POWER) Pkg A3 (GND) Pkg pulldown_ref Digital Port Pkg A4 A6 (GND) Pkg

  10. Q2: Traditional Packages • Traditional Package Models • [Package], [Package Model] and R_pin, etc. • How do these relate to power/ground connections? • Example • Pin A1 is defined POWER. It has R_pin, L_pin, C_pin associated with it (this is not prohibited) • Is the package model connected to this pin? • If so, where is “the other end” of the package? • If not, is pin A1 a direct short (and if so, to where)? • Same question applies to [Package Model] • “Endpoint” is assumed the die pad; which one? • Currently, only [Pin Mapping] resolves this situation • Without 4.1 port definitions (A_puref) or [Pin Mapping], package details on power are meaningless

  11. Q3: IBIS 4.1 Ports • IBIS 4.1 creates standard ports (A_puref) for [E. Model] • Same port names can be applied to [E. Circuit] • Should we allow use of A_puref, etc. ports for package definitions, [Pin Mapping], etc.? • Example: Pin A1 (POWER) connects to A_puref for I/O pin A2 • If not, [External Model] cannot connect to packages without ICM • See Fig. 12 in IBIS 4.1; where do these ports go? • How do [Pin Mapping] and [Package Model] connect to A_puref? • Option 1: assume A_puref = pullup_ref • Shorts all [External Model] supplies • This prohibits multiple buffer instances now in BIRD100 • Option 2: allow “A_puref” in [Pin Mapping] syntax • Option 3: allow “instance_name.A_puref” in [Pin Mapping] • Also allows [Package Model] to use ports & multiple instances

  12. Q4: IBIS 4.1 Ports for [Model] • IBIS 4.1 suggests ports apply to native [Model]s • “Native” [Model]: [Model] without [External Model] • Do we allow A_puref to be used with native [Model]s? • Should instance_name be permitted alongside these constructs? • If so, [External Model] just got expanded to work with multiple instantiations (not necessarily bad)

  13. Proposals • Prohibit [Pin Mapping] and [External Circuit] • Prohibit [Pin Mapping] and [External Model] • Document [Pin Mapping] as connecting packages to buffers (packages connect to pins) • Permit use of ports with traditional IBIS • Example, A_puref for [Model] without [E. Model] • Permit use of [Package Model] with [E. Model] • Allow dot notation “Pad” subparameter in [Package Model] • Example: Pad=myinstance.A_puref, wheremyinstanceis a specific instance_name under [Pin] • Permit ICM for ALL flavors of IBIS (native, multi-lingual) • [Model], [External Model] links must use the die node syntaxinstance_name.port_name • Integrate ICM parser into IBIS parser • Raise total IBIS parser fee to $3000 • Permits checking of ICM as [Package Model] file • Permit ICM code within an IBIS model

More Related