Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rsmitra09

  1. PSS allows both control-flow and data-flow dependencies. Control flow is among statements within an activity, whereas data-flow permits inferencing which additional actions to be scheduled and when. However, the semantics for mixing these 2 kinds of flow is not specified in the manual. For example, take the code given below, which has 3 actions defined in it: read3_write3: User explicitly calls read and write inside a loop, and inferencing is not needed. read1_write3: User explicitly calls read outside the loop, and calls write inside the loop, and again inferencing is not needed.
  2. Agreed that (a;b)&(c;d) may possibly be illegal because a and d use the same resource. But if a takes very less time to execute and c takes a long time, then a and d may not overlap their execution times, and so the conflict may not actually arise during simulation. So, my question is: is the legality check done statically (and pessimistically) or dynamically (ie during simulation time)?
  3. I found one more bug in the grammar: For example-71, which has an action declaration inside an activity, the grammar has to be updated: activity_stmt: : ... | action_field_declaration // add this rule ... Another bug is mentioned in the post "one full example".
  4. Given that this concept of a high level test specification is fairly new, what is critically needed is one complete example which shows the entire flow of usage. The videos from DAC-2017 show some code snippets from an UART/DMAC example, but that also does not show the complete code. So I have taken the code snippets from the DAC tutorial, and put them together as one full code (see below). Can this example be corrected, more details added (for instance, variations for inferring from incomplete specifications) and the full code be added to the next version of the manual? While creati
  5. Hi, Based on Accellera's recently released standard, I am now developing a PSS front-end. While doing this, I came across several grammar problems, and also some typos in the example code given in the document. In this email, I have attached 2 text documents: (1) error_grammar.txt : a list of grammar problems, and their suggested fixes. (2) error_examples.txt : a list of typo mistakes in the examples. The page numbers mentioned are the pdf page numbers, NOT the printed page numbers. I would like to hear from the others if these mentioned fixes are good, or other change
  • Create New...