| Id | Category | Summary | Resolution | Duplicate ID | Sv* Vote | SV* comment | Ch Recc | Ch Vote | Ch comment |
| 499 | SV-BC | rule 7 section 6.9.2 could be written in a simple way | fixed | 0 | 1:abs | The abstention was by Cliff who felt he needed more time to digest the proposal. | Approval | Unanimous | |
| 713 | SV-EC | #0 and the inactive region (549, 4.1) | fixed | 0 | 1:abs | one abstain by Francoise because not expert on this topic | Approval | Unanimous | |
| 722 | SV-EC | Re-inactive region | fixed | 0 | 6:yes, 1:abs, 2 No | Abstain:
Cliff 1. gut feeling is the proposal is good 2. a semi-complex late-stage change 3. may diminish consensus Opposed: Dave - not enough time to review internally Francoise - against re-inactive region, and also wants to get rid of the inactive region as well. |
Approval: Brad, Neil, Bassam, Surrendra; Return to the SV-EC: Francoise, Dave, Stu, Tom | Francoise believes that this is a big change in the central piece of the simulation algorithm, and we do not have enough time to evaluate if this will resolve issues or add more. We should not be adding time cues to solve testbench/design interactions. There is not enough time to resolve it. Dave believes that since the ballot comment was removed, the change should be removed. Brad and Neil believe that these are real issues that must be resolved, and that this is a good way to resolve them. Stu is concerned that there is not enough concensus. | |
| 344 | SV-EC | The semantics of an anonymous program is not defined anywhere (19.2) | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Friendly amendment to change "procedures" to "tasks and functions" in changes 17.1 and 17.6 | Unanimous | SV-EC is ok with the change | |
| 485 | SV-CC | 32.29 Clarify difference between a thread and a frame | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Discussion | Unanimous | Stu doesn't like this. He would prefer to break backwards compatibility in P1364 rather than in P1800. Karen to speak with Johny about addressing this before the P1800 meeting. | |
| 723 | SV-CC | Fixing "user-defined system task or function" terminology | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | Affects both LRMs | |
| 345 | SV-CC | VPI changes to support Encryption | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | Encryption committee to comment on the number of envelopes shall be no less than 8 | |
| 734 | SV-CC | Resolve issues in 15.3 with regard to PLI callbacks | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | SV-EC to review? The EC added comment s about the PLI and the CC added notes indicating that the callbacks don't exist yet. These are placeholders for future callbacks. | |
| 106 | SV-BC | SV-BC Issue 31: Erratta or simple proposal for task, function, property, sequenceargu | duplicate | 96 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 171 | SV-EC | Configuration of programs | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 246 | SV-EC | Random object stability example code | not a bug | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 248 | SV-EC | Missing ';' in clocking_drive definition | not a bug | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 257 | SV-CC | No vpi access defined for enhanced for loops | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 294 | SV-CC | 32.22 Waiting process as task or function handle | duplicate | 528 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 317 | SV-EC | class as a bit-stream type | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 319 | SV-EC | what is the root thread? this term is not defined but used | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 340 | SV-EC | More problems in queue method prototypes | duplicate | 523 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 369 | SV-CC | SystemVerilog VPI sections do not deal with generates | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 370 | SV-EC | what is the seed of top level threads in the case of hierarchical seeding | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 376 | V-PTF | 26.6.6 Need to remove multiple labels on a one arrow | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 377 | SV-CC | "32.25 Module path, path term" does not reflect all the changes made in P1364 | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 383 | SV-BC | Type equivalence of packed unions | duplicate | 631 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 384 | SV-EC | mailbox type compatibility | duplicate | 514 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 409 | SV-EC | Operations allowed on ref arguments not specified | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 416 | V-PTF | 27 - Need to not use the ambiguous term 'user' | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 418 | V-PTF | PTF 562 Need to have a vpiTimeConst in the vpi_user.h file | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 422 | SV-CC | 29.1.1 should be removed | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 426 | SV-CC | 29.3.2.1 Return value of vpi_get_assertion_info() is backwards | duplicate | 425 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 431 | SV-CC | 29.5 pollutes the VPI name space | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 437 | SV-CC | 30.4.4 Last paragraph does not make sense | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 441 | SV-CC | Annex I - Assertion #defines overlaps with object types | not a bug | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 445 | SV-CC | Several Superseded sections missing information | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 447 | SV-CC | 32.5 missing types for properties | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 449 | SV-CC | 32.11 vpiPortType is missing from the include file | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 451 | SV-CC | 32.5 Why the need for an interface tf decl? | not a bug | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 454 | SV-CC | 32.11 incorrect format for the 2nd note | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 455 | SV-CC | 32.12.1 poorly written paragraphs | duplicate | 489 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 458 | SV-CC | 32.13 Question on the range relation | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 465 | SV-CC | 32.19 Please clarify vpiWaitingProcesses iteration | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 472 | SV-CC | 32.22 Note 1 needs clarification | duplicate | 528 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 481 | SV-CC | 32.26 Note 1 needs clarification | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 483 | SV-CC | 32.28 Should document backwards compatibility issue | duplicate | 485 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 487 | SV-CC | 32.34 Order of operands should be in 32.39 | duplicate | 686 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 489 | SV-CC | 32.38 Need better definition of a ref obj object. | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 492 | SV-BC | 6.9.1 rule 7 of definition of matching types | duplicate | 499 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 493 | SV-BC | definition of the scope of a type in section 6.9 | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 496 | SV-CC | 32.43 No explanation for a regular assignment | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 501 | SV-BC | section 22.1 | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 510 | SV-BC | what are the operators allowed on unpacked structs, unions and classes? | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 512 | SV-EC | section 12.25 bullet 2) | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 514 | SV-EC | mailbox type mismatch | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 523 | SV-EC | undefined queue_type in prototypes pop_front and pop_back | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 528 | SV-CC | 32.21 missing iteration on type declarations | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 532 | SV-EC | A.2.1.3 - BNF for data_declaration is not consistent with 6.2 | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 536 | SV-CC | Annex E.6.2 - packed struct and union types with DPI | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 539 | V-PTF | 26.1 use of 'user' | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 541 | V-PTF | 26.2.1 Several uses of the term 'user' | duplicate | 539 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 547 | SV-CC | 32.47 two tagged pattern objects in pattern class | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 595 | SV-EC | 16.4 Invalid example | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 606 | SV-CC | 32.30 Problems with data model for clocking blocks | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 607 | SV-EC | 4.3.3 Accessing values of clocking variables | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 650 | SV-CC | Program and interface access to initial, always and final blocks is not supported | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 658 | V-1364 | Fix NOTE references | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 680 | V-1364 | BTF-350 & 99: Proposal to deprecate configs in Verilog source files | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 684 | SV-CC | 32.39 vpiMultiConcat should be vpiMultiConcatOp | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 685 | V-PTF | 26.6.26 vpiMultiConcat should be vpiMultiConcatOp | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 686 | SV-CC | 32.34 & 32.36 Which operators for assertion "and" and "or" in VPI? | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 687 | V-1364 | compatability pragma - was BTF 287 | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 688 | V-1364 | ETF618: $timeskew/$fullskew issues | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 689 | SV-BC | Add word 'additional' for clarity -- ballot issue 287 | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 697 | SV-BC | Ballot Feedback Issue 257: file IO tasks and new SV data types | won't fix | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 698 | SV-BC | Ballot Feedback Issue 265: No Definition of Error and Warning | won't fix | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 703 | SV-EC | Incorrect syntax given in P1800 Clause 13.5.2 | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 705 | V-1364 | Was ETF 659 - fullskew | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 706 | SV-CC | assignment pattern allowed as lvalues | not a bug | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 707 | SV-EC | scheduling algorithm is incorrect preponed preactive (549, 1.1) | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 708 | SV-EC | Scheduling semantics PLI region feedback loop missing (549, 1.2) | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 709 | SV-EC | Preponed region definition (549, 2.1) | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 710 | SV-EC | observed region defintion (549, 2.1) | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 711 | SV-EC | postponed region definition (549, 2.3) | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 712 | SV-EC | cbAtEndOfSimTime definition incorrect (549, 2.4) | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 714 | SV-EC | Incorrect cross select expressions example | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 715 | SV-EC | Clarifications in functional coverage examples | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 717 | SV-CC | assignment patterns can be lvalue according to 623 | duplicate | 706 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 718 | SV-CC | asymetric casex statement | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 719 | SV-CC | Enhance VPI to support data types as "type(expression) or type(datatype)" | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 720 | SV-EC | Change needed in coverpoint syntax to support open ranges | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 721 | SV-CC | Add PLI support for structure and type initialization | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 724 | SV-EC | Incorrect transition bin example and synt | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 725 | SV-EC | Matching of class specializations | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 726 | SV-CC | Add vpiAssertion object type into sv_vpi_user.h | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 728 | SV-BC | Reconcile BNF with configuration changes by 1364 | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 729 | SV-EC | Generate should be allowed in programs | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous | ||
| 730 | SV-EC | Return type of getc() is byte | fixed | 0 | Unanimous | Approval | Unanimous |