dita-sidsc message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: [dita-sidsc] Finished updating register element spreadsheet.
- From: "Cihak Thomas" <tom.cihak@freescale.com>
- To: "Semiconductor Information Design Subcommittee" <dita-sidsc@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:19:57 -0700
I have finished updating the register element
spreadsheet. I thought it would send out an email but neither Doug nor I has
received one yet, so maybe I did something wrong.
If you later get the official email, I apologize for
the duplication. Here is the message I tried to send:
Background
The SIDSC dimension element is defined to
be a string that supports a comma-separated list of integers. <dimension>
can be instantiated multiple times.
The IP-XACT dim element on which the
SIDSC element was based is defined as an integer. <dim> too can be
instantiated multiple times.
Recommendation
I recommend we adopt the IP-XACT
convention of using multiply instantiated integer values, then realign with the
next revision of IP-XACT if we choose. We clearly don't need or want both a
comma-separated list and multiple instantiation, and I think the comma-separated
list will be troublesome both to parse and to validate. Using integer values
also mirrors the current IP-XACT schemas.
Details
It looks to me as though an IP-XACT
annotation on the dim element was misinterpreted when the SIDSC element was
being developed. This annotation reads "Dimensions a register array, the
semantics for dim elements are the same as the C language standard for the
layout of memory in multidimensional arrays."
A Freescale person who is involved with IP-XACT
confirmed that the intent of this annotation was to signal a document order
dependence. In other words, dim elements are defined in the same order they
would appear in a C language array declaration, and they should be interpreted
as such. This is recognized among IP-XACT members as a potential source of
trouble.
One possible solution would be to introduce a list
structure in which the ordering of dimensions is made explicit. Another solution
would be to nest dim elements, so that the logical structure of a
multi-dimension array would be mirrored in the element structure. Both solutions
are being considered for IP-XACT rev 1.5 due in early 2009.
However, my source said that to the best of his
knowledge, no one has proposed changing the <dim> element into a
non-integer.
with best regards
Tom Cihak
Freescale Semiconductor
512-996-5072
tom.cihak@freescale.com
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]