Open Core Protocol International Partnership Governing ... - OCP-IP

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Mentor’s activities. Drew said that a way for them to better achieve phase two was by buildingdocuments and including reference examples. Drew explained that a reference example aroundOCP would be in Cadence and Mentor’s best interests.AI (Ian): Ask Brophy when Mentor will define the precise contents of phase 2 and ask if hewill entertain a discussion about the value of incorporating OCP-related work to morerapidly grow their appeal to a larger community. (November 29, 2007)AI (VTM): Allow debug specification to go directly into member review following criticalacknowledgement of quality from Texas Instruments and Nokia and the more active DebugWorking Group members. (4Q07)Ian stated that the GSC had talked the night before about creating an OCP-IP/SPIRIT WorkingGroup. Ian said that the question remained what OCP-IP should do about SPIRIT engagement.Drew said that there was already trouble getting resources for the SPIRIT Schema WorkingGroup. Drew said that the only way to accomplish anything within SPIRIT was by taking on thework yourself. Ralph asked what kinds of changes to the SPIRIT schema were necessary. Drewsaid that OCP is a highly configurable interface, and that we need semantically equivalentinterfaces in the RTL configuration. Drew went on to say that there were a wide variety of interparameterdependencies. Ralph said that Synopsys had a need for highly parameterizedinterfaces. Drew said that the reason Sonics joined SPIRIT was because Gary Delp had saidthey could get things done if they did the work themselves. Drew said that he was not againsthaving Sonics contribute to the work, but they needed to have someone else in the inner circlethat they could work with. Ian asked what needed to be done structurally, and if someoneneeded to take the lead. Drew asked Ralph if Synopsys was motivated to see a change happenwithin SPIRIT. Ralph said that at one point they were very motivated, but now Synopsys haddecided they might live with a difficult situation. Ralph went on to say that it was worth having ameeting, and that if he could see a path, he might be more motivated to make it happen.AI (VTM): Call a meeting to occur within mid-December to discuss an OCP-IP collaborationto make progress with SPIRIT; attendees must be Mark Knoll, Ralph, Drew, Vesa, Maaroui,Ian, and James. (November 22, 2007)Ian asked Drew if CoreCreator would be functionally diminished in the newCoreCreator/DesignWare tool. Drew replied that it would be a subset. Drew said that he hadreceived an email stating that the Sonics/Synopsys release would now be January 15, 2008.Ian updated the group about his discussions with Mentor regarding the posting of the OCBSpecification on the LSI Logic Web site. Ian said that he had told VSIA that they may not have thelegal rights due to varied working group contribution agreements that had been developed. Iansaid that Bill Martin of Mentor was casual about our concerns regarding a rebirth from the OCBSpecification base. Ian said that Mentor, Synopsys and Cadence should all disagree with theidea of posting the OCB Specification in the public domain. Ian said that once VSIA went out ofbusiness the stewardship agreement between OCP-IP and VSIA dissolved. Ian told the groupthat Kathy Werner said there was a chance the OCB Specification would be used in China andwas wanted in Japan. Ian emphasized that this was what OCP-IP should not want to happen.Ian said that VSIA’s own attorney told them not to post this in the public domain, but VSIA haddecided to do so anyway. Ian said that Bruce Rodgers told him that Virtual did not want to spendmoney to resolve this issue. Ian said he thought it might be beneficial for GSC members to lookat their working group contribution agreements and subsequently send VSIA a letter, ifappropriate, saying they may not have the rights to proceed with the public posting of the OCBSpecification.AI (Drew): Check if Sonics has grounds to send a letter of disapproval to VSIA and followup with VSIA appropriately. (November 29, 2007)OCP-IP CONFIDENTIALGoverning Steering Committee Meeting Minutes 11/8/2007Page 20 of 22
AI (Vesa): Check if Nokia has grounds to send a letter of disapproval to VSIA and follow upwith VSIA appropriately. (November 29, 2007)Ian reviewed the number of recent DesignWare shipments. Ian informed the GSC that a total of28 companies had taken copies since July 15, 2007 of which nine had requested their freelicenses through OCP-IP.Ian informed the group of Princeton University’s upgrade to Sponsor level in lieu of KostasAisopos’ contribution to the Cache Coherence Subgroup. Ian stated that Kostas had been anintern at Sonics over the summer and had contributed to the Cache Coherence Subgroup beforereturning to school in the fall. The group stated that there were no objections.Ian asked for nominations for the OCP-IP Contributor of the Year Award. Vesa suggestedGreensocs and the University of British Columbia, which was behind the NoC BWG work. Drewsaid that he felt rewarding the NoC BWG work was premature. Drew went on to say that the onlyother company he could think of was Jeda. James said that they had been quiet recently. Ianreminded the group that the award was given to Synopsys in the previous year.MotionVesa motioned to award Greensocs the Contributor of the Year Award for 2007. Drew secondedthe motion. The vote was approved: 5 yeas, 0 nays and 0 abstentions.AI (VTM): Notify Greensocs that they are the OCP-IP Contributor of the Year for 2007.(November 15, 2007)PR UpdateJoe Basques joined the meeting at 3:25 P.M. PST.Joe reviewed the OCP-IP public relations update.Joe mentioned that Cadence would have an article by the end of November that may run in lateDecember or early January. Joe asked the GSC if they had a resource inside Mentor that mighthelp get an article written. Joe said that MITRE was looking to write an article on how much timeand money was saved by using OCP. Joe said that the ITRI seminar in Taiwan should be a verysuccessful event, but noted that the ECSI seminar had been postponed until January or February2008. Ian told Joe that the GSC had discussed details on the creation of the OCP book theprevious night at dinner and he would share that discussion with Joe at a later time.AI (Ian/Joe): Explore candidate book editors and look to find ways to get work underway.(December 15, 2007)Joe stated he would like to create and distribute a standards body survey that would capturecritical elements of key industry trade organizations that would be shared with contributors andposted on the OCP-IP Web site and/or published later in an article.Joe said this standards body survey would drive cooperation and information sharing with otherorganizations. Joe said that people were generally unsure of what trade organizations coverwhat elements, what the overlap was, and what working groups they had. Joe said that this couldbe an opportunity for OCP-IP to be seen as a leader in driving cooperation with otherorganizations. Joe said that the requested information would be nothing intrusive.AI (Joe): Explore interest of other standards bodies to participate in survey. (January 15,2008)AI (Ian/Joe): Initiate Survey. (January 15. 2008)OCP-IP CONFIDENTIALGoverning Steering Committee Meeting Minutes 11/8/2007Page 21 of 22
Page 1 and 2: Open Core Protocol International Pa
Page 3 and 4: AI (VTM): Allow debug specification
Page 6 and 7: James reviewed the SLD WG’s statu
Page 8 and 9: to be well thought out because it w
Page 10 and 11: Ian said that the FVWG did not have
Page 12 and 13: Ian said that OCP-IP was working wi
Page 14 and 15: to release the NoC definition speci
Page 16 and 17: Drew said that the third SWG issue
Page 18 and 19: AI (Nakada-san): Provide GSC with a
Page 22: Recruiting UpdateJoe and Ian review

Open Core Protocol International Partnership Governing ... - OCP-IP

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?