Site Home   Archive Home   FAQ Home   How to search the Archive   How to Navigate the Archive   
Compare FPGA features and resources   

Threads starting:
1994JulAugSepOctNovDec1994
1995JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1995
1996JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1996
1997JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1997
1998JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1998
1999JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1999
2000JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2000
2001JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2001
2002JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2002
2003JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2003
2004JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2004
2005JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2005
2006JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2006
2007JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2007
2008JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2008
2009JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2009
2010JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2010
2011JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2011
2012JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2012
2013JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2013
2014JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2014
2015JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2015
2016JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2016
2017JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2017
2018JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2018
2019JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2019
2020JanFebMarAprMay2020

Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Custom Search

Messages from 96100

Article: 96100
Subject: Re: tristate to logic conversion
From: "John_H" <johnhandwork@mail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:59:18 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
<wtxwtx@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1138639411.086462.285470@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hi Mike,
> I disagree with your opinion.
>
> BLOCK RAM data output is driven by its address, no matter it is old or
> brand new. How does it work for a 4K bytes block? Each RAM bit
> internally drives a 1-bit tristate data bus selected by its address
> decode logic. From outside, it is only one data output bus.
>
> For any CPUs, its SRAM in cache are also driven by its addresses. So
> tristate buses are as ubiquitous as a register. No any exception is for
> general FPGA design.
>
> Only passive tristate bus is rarely used and shouldn't be used for an
> active data bus.
>
> Weng



So my earlier comment that you disagreed with should be modified to state:

"But it's never good design practice to have [Verilog] tristates with 
multiple [simultaneous] sources"

I don't think anyone doubts that tristate functionality in silicon IP blocks 
is a bad idea because the issues of multiple simultaneous drivers is 
excluded. 



Article: 96101
Subject: Re: tristate to logic conversion
From: wtxwtx@gmail.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 09:14:37 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi John,
I would like to say:
Multiple sources can safely drive a tristate bus without any bad
effects if their enable signals are mutually exclusive either by their
logic or by physical conditions.

There are many situations where mutually exclusive conditions exist by
their physical conditions, not by their logic. For example, you must
drive a data bus on two different physical conditions, then their
enable signals are mutually exclusive. For example, if one chip has to
drive a bus, the bus runs with either 64-bit or 32-bit conditions. The
source enable signals driving 64-bit and 32-bit are mutually exclusive,
no matter how your design logic is.

Weng



John_H wrote:
> <wtxwtx@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1138639411.086462.285470@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> > Hi Mike,
> > I disagree with your opinion.
> >
> > BLOCK RAM data output is driven by its address, no matter it is old or
> > brand new. How does it work for a 4K bytes block? Each RAM bit
> > internally drives a 1-bit tristate data bus selected by its address
> > decode logic. From outside, it is only one data output bus.
> >
> > For any CPUs, its SRAM in cache are also driven by its addresses. So
> > tristate buses are as ubiquitous as a register. No any exception is for
> > general FPGA design.
> >
> > Only passive tristate bus is rarely used and shouldn't be used for an
> > active data bus.
> >
> > Weng
>
>
>
> So my earlier comment that you disagreed with should be modified to state:
>
> "But it's never good design practice to have [Verilog] tristates with
> multiple [simultaneous] sources"
>
> I don't think anyone doubts that tristate functionality in silicon IP blocks
> is a bad idea because the issues of multiple simultaneous drivers is
> excluded.


Article: 96102
Subject: TI Technical screening phone interview
From: "morpheus" <saurster@gmail.com>
Date: 30 Jan 2006 09:46:01 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hey All,
I have a technical screen interview with TI based in dallas. I am a
front-end digital design engineer with two years of experience is
designing DSPs in FPGAs. This is the first time I would be going
through a technical screening-don't know what it means actually...is it
a fancier term for a technical interview? Anyways, if anyone has gone
through this, please share your experience-it would be good info
cheers
MORPHEUS


Article: 96103
Subject: Xilinx Legal
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 09:50:46 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
All:

 From our legal group-

"Xilinx invests a significant amount in research and development, and
vigorously protects and enforces its intellectual property rights
resulting from its research and development efforts.  It is also correct
that when Xilinx licenses its software and tools, Xilinx prohibits its
customers from reverse engineering and decompiling its software
products.  Also, the bitstream created by using Xilinx software is owned
by Xilinx can only be used on Xilinx programmable products, for example,
FPGAs.

Xilinx licensing terms and conditions are similar to other companies
that provide similar products and services.  Therefore, Xilinx sees no
basis for amending or modifying the terms and conditions of its software
licenses and the rights to use the bitstream created with the use of
Xilinx software."

For Xilinx sponsored University projects, there may be separate 
agreements (I know because I am sponsoring a project, and I had to 
review the new agreement).

So, for anyone using our software, read the agreement, and be sure you 
are in compliance.  If you desire to do anything outside of the 
agreement, please contact our legal department, or the Xilinx University 
Program.

Austin

Article: 96104
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 10:25:52 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Austin Lesea wrote:
> So, for anyone using our software, read the agreement, and be sure you
> are in compliance.  If you desire to do anything outside of the
> agreement, please contact our legal department, or the Xilinx University
> Program.

Austin,

Thanks for being direct and bringing this info directly to this forum.

The broad assumption is that XDL and the interfaces/libraries
that it exposes are a public interface. Combined with the fact
that is it openly disclosed outside NDA on a very large number of
projects,
what is the specific Xilinx statement about XDL and related info being
a public use interface to ISE outside of NDA restrictions?

John


Article: 96105
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:35:58 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On a sunny day (Mon, 30 Jan 2006 09:50:46 -0800) it happened Austin Lesea
<austin@xilinx.com> wrote in <drljlm$3ls1@xco-news.xilinx.com>:

>All:
>
> From our legal group-

> Also, the bitstream created by using Xilinx software is owned
>by Xilinx can only be used on Xilinx programmable products, for example,
>FPGAs.

This looks like arather dangerous typo, I presume you wanted to write:

"the bitstream format as generated by Xilinx software "
You do not claim rights to the content of my bitstream I hope?


?

Article: 96106
Subject: Re: TI Technical screening phone interview
From: Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:48:18 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
morpheus wrote:

> Hey All,
> I have a technical screen interview with TI based in dallas. I am a
> front-end digital design engineer with two years of experience is
> designing DSPs in FPGAs. This is the first time I would be going
> through a technical screening-don't know what it means actually...is it
> a fancier term for a technical interview? Anyways, if anyone has gone
> through this, please share your experience-it would be good info
> cheers
> MORPHEUS
> 
It means whatever TI thinks it means.

It could be an engineer asking you technical questions, or it could be a 
recruiter asking you the same.  It's hard to say.

On the opposite side from you, I have conducted preliminary phone 
interviews, I've compiled questions for phone screeners to ask and I've 
evaluated answers from those same screens.  I know that when I do it I 
usually try to ask questions that are hard enough to trip up the 
interviewee at least once, and I don't look for a 100% score to 
recommend a hire.  What I do look for is 'yes' answers to the following 
questions:

* Will this guy come up to speed quickly?
* Will this guy keep up in the long run?
* Can this guy talk about what he does so his work will be traceable?
* Can this guy work within a group?
* Can this guy understand where we come from?

Note that the first two questions start with 'will' -- I think it's 
unrealistic to hire with the expectation that someone will already know 
everything about the task.  I _do_ think it's realistic that someone 
will be be _able_ to learn all the local peculiarities quickly, and be 
useful in a matter of a few weeks.  I also think it's realistic to 
expect that anyone who's not a fresh college hire (and most that are) 
have already worked in a group with good work documentation.

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Article: 96107
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:58:53 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
John,

"XDL and related info being a public use interface to ISE outside of NDA 
restrictions" is clearly prohibited.

But, if XDL is used inside of the agreement, then that is OK.

For example, if you created a XDL file with our tools, and then 
processed it with your tool, and then wanted to use in in silicon other 
than Xilinx, that is prohibited.

If you created your own XDL file, without use of our tools, sent it 
through your own tools, to do something with it (for reasons unknown) 
then I suppose (but we can research further) we don't care what you do 
with it.

But if you then used our tools again (to do anything) to the XDL (you 
created), then again, its use is restricted to Xilinx silicon.

So, if our software is part of the chain, then the agreement applies.

Austin


Article: 96108
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: Jim Granville <no.spam@designtools.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:01:47 +1300
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Jan Panteltje wrote:
> On a sunny day (Mon, 30 Jan 2006 09:50:46 -0800) it happened Austin Lesea
> <austin@xilinx.com> wrote in <drljlm$3ls1@xco-news.xilinx.com>:
> 
> 
>>All:
>>
>>From our legal group-
> 
> 
>>Also, the bitstream created by using Xilinx software is owned
>>by Xilinx can only be used on Xilinx programmable products, for example,
>>FPGAs.

Hmm, yes, not everyone will agree to that claim...

> 
> This looks like a rather dangerous typo, I presume you wanted to write:
> 
> "the bitstream format as generated by Xilinx software "
> You do not claim rights to the content of my bitstream I hope?

Of course they do!
  These are lawyers, they claim all rights possible, until someone
pushes back. That's how they work.

  I _can_ sense an opening here, for the (A) company that claims
to be "the fastest growing major programmable logic company in 2005"

-jg



Article: 96109
Subject: Re: XDL Tools wiki site
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 12:30:02 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Phil Tomson wrote:
> I've set up a wiki space for discussion of ideas for an open source XDL tool
> suite.  For those not familiar with wikis, they are collaborative web spaces
> that can be edited by anyone (for now it is editable by anyone; if there are
> problems we can restrict edit access to approved authors) or by a
> select set of individuals.  They're used quite commonly for software projects
> now as they are great for discussion of features, todo lists, idea boards, etc.

Well Austin just clearified XDL's use:

"XDL and related info being a public use interface to ISE outside of
NDA
restrictions" is clearly prohibited.

Which basically includes any public discussion of XDL and open source
access
to XDL.


Article: 96110
Subject: Re: Digilent FPGA & Handel-C
From: Brian Drummond <brian_drummond@btconnect.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:33:20 +0000 (UTC)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:01:37 +0000 (UTC),
christopher.saunter@durham.ac.uk (c d saunter) wrote:

>Robin Bruce (robin.bruce@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>: Hans wrote:
>: > If you have to choose a C language I would recommend you check out SystemC
>: > which might be better on your CV than Handel-C :-)
>
>: What's so good about SystemC? :)
>
>What's so good about AnythingC?
>
>I have quite strong feelings that whilst a high level language than 
>Verilog/VHDL could be a real boon to FPGA development, C is far from a 
>good prototype form for such a language....

uh, in what way is C a higher level language than VHDL anyway?

- Brian


Article: 96111
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 12:38:05 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Austin Lesea wrote:
> "XDL and related info being a public use interface to ISE outside of NDA
> restrictions" is clearly prohibited.

Thanks Austin for making this clear.  You mentioned that Xilinx
provides
exemptions to university projects. There is significant documentation
to
be gleaned from various published works which are easily located with
google. Most of these appear to be university sources.

Can we assume that source code, VDL files, papers, and instructional
materials which describe VDL and related interfaces are approved
disclosures by Xilinx that open source can freely use to develop
open source tools in support of Xilinx customers?

John


Article: 96112
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 12:54:28 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
John,

No, you can not assume anything.  In fact, I think you (personally) 
should talk to our legal department, and reach an agreement.

Austin


Article: 96113
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 12:56:47 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Jan,

Xilinx restricts the use of the bitstream to only be used with its products.

In that sense, we retain "ownership."  I am not a lawyer, so I can't 
speak or quote legalize.  What I placed in quotes was from a lawyer.

They do not make typos.

I might.

Austin


Article: 96114
Subject: Re: XDL Tools wiki site
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:10:48 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Phil,

If you desire an opinion, please contact our legal group.

John's email to you is incomplete.  Go read my posting, and make your 
own decision.  Or better yet, contact our legal department,

Austin

Article: 96115
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:13:00 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Correction:

See I can make typos...

Austin


> In that sense, we retain "ownership."  I am not a lawyer, so I can't 
> speak or quote legalize.  What I placed in quotes

IN MY PREVIOUS POSTING

> was from a lawyer.

Article: 96116
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: Ed McGettigan <ed.mcgettigan@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:18:46 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Jim Granville wrote:
> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> On a sunny day (Mon, 30 Jan 2006 09:50:46 -0800) it happened Austin Lesea
>> <austin@xilinx.com> wrote in <drljlm$3ls1@xco-news.xilinx.com>:
>>
>>
>>> All:
>>>
>>> From our legal group-
>>
>>
>>> Also, the bitstream created by using Xilinx software is owned
>>> by Xilinx can only be used on Xilinx programmable products, for example,
>>> FPGAs.
> 
> Hmm, yes, not everyone will agree to that claim...
> 
>>
>> This looks like a rather dangerous typo, I presume you wanted to write:
>>
>> "the bitstream format as generated by Xilinx software "
>> You do not claim rights to the content of my bitstream I hope?
> 
> Of course they do!
>  These are lawyers, they claim all rights possible, until someone
> pushes back. That's how they work.
> 
>  I _can_ sense an opening here, for the (A) company that claims
> to be "the fastest growing major programmable logic company in 2005"
> 
> -jg
> 
> 

The (A) company used these exact same EULA restrictions against Clear Logic
and won.

More details here: http://www.internetcases.com/archives/2005/09/ninth_circuit_a_1.html

Ed

Article: 96117
Subject: Re: XDL Tools wiki site
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 13:51:28 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Austin Lesea wrote:
> Phil,
>
> If you desire an opinion, please contact our legal group.
>
> John's email to you is incomplete.  Go read my posting, and make your
> own decision.  Or better yet, contact our legal department,
>
> Austin

What did I miss Austin? .... the EULA NDA terms and your statement
clearly mean personal use only, disclosure in public discussions can
not assume the other members are under the same NDA terms, and you have
been clear that no open source access exists.

That leaves limited EDIF and XNF access to open source tools which
produce net lists for Xilinx ISE.


Article: 96118
Subject: Re: Virtex4 : Audio Codec AC97 LM4550
From: John Williams <jwilliams@itee.uq.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:03:58 +1000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Lori Lorenser wrote:

> Hi.
> 
> I'm working with the Virtex 4 on a ML403 and want to use the audio codec AC97. At first i want to connect a mp3-player to line in and then i want to manipulate the audiostream and send it to line out. But i don't find a detailled description (e.g not in ml403 userguide) of the audio codec. So i don't know which pin i should use.
> 
> Does anybody know a paper/tutorial/user guide or something else, how to use the audio codec on ml403(virtex 4)?

The Xilinx ML40x reference designs all contain an OPB peripheral that
can talk to the AC97.  The full source is provided, so that would be a
good place to start.

www.xilinx.com/ml403

Regards,

John

Article: 96119
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: cs_posting@hotmail.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 14:10:59 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Austin Lesea wrote:
> John,
>
> No, you can not assume anything.  In fact, I think you (personally)
> should talk to our legal department, and reach an agreement.

It seems to me that part of the problem is that Xilinx is used to
negotiating special provisions with customers one by one, and may even
be quite responsive and liberal in doing so with fairly small
customers.

That's fine for closed projects, but open source efforts under "free
software" licensing may only make use of information or components
which may be freely shared with all potential users, with the only
restrictions on disclosure, permissable uses or modifications being
that you cannot impose new restrictions on disclosure, permissable use
or modification.

As a result, the only usefull answers to the kinds of questions that
have been asked are published, public ones.

Though some of the questioning and floating of trial answers could take
place behind the scenes.


Article: 96120
Subject: Re: Impact 8.1 problems with non xilinx device in chain
From: John Williams <jwilliams@itee.uq.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:15:18 +1000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Antti Lukats wrote:

> I just love how easy it is to port uClinux to new platform, just
> change the UCF file and there you go :)

You know Antti, in a very strange way you can take some credit for that
fact.  Your statement in a comp.arch.fpga posting 18 months ago

http://groups.google.com.au/group/comp.arch.fpga/browse_frm/thread/97f020e714a25237/2a12c984240d22e8?tvc=1&q=lukats+uclinux#2a12c984240d22e8

"NIOS uCLinux is WAY easier to get started then MicroBlaze uCLinux
thanks to the full integration of the config and integration into
Eclipse workbench, as EDK6.3 is also Eclipse based it would be possible
todo the same for MicroBlaze uClinux config and build. "

p***ed me off so much I went and created the auto-config mechanisms that
now make mb-uclinux by far the easiest (and probably most popular)
soft-CPU Linux solution around.

So, thanks - I think :)

John

Article: 96121
Subject: Re: XDL Tools wiki site
From: ptkwt@aracnet.com (Phil Tomson)
Date: 30 Jan 2006 22:15:46 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In article <drlvcp$3ls5@xco-news.xilinx.com>,
Austin Lesea  <austin@xilinx.com> wrote:
>Phil,
>
>If you desire an opinion, please contact our legal group.
>
>John's email to you is incomplete.  Go read my posting, and make your 
>own decision.  Or better yet, contact our legal department,
>

Yeah, that's the plan at this point.  

As is with most everything related to law, the more that is said, the muddier 
things get ;-)

Phil


Article: 96122
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 14:24:46 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

cs_posting@hotmail.com wrote:

> That's fine for closed projects, but open source efforts under "free
> software" licensing may only make use of information or components
> which may be freely shared with all potential users, with the only
> restrictions on disclosure, permissable uses or modifications being
> that you cannot impose new restrictions on disclosure, permissable use
> or modification.
>
> As a result, the only usefull answers to the kinds of questions that
> have been asked are published, public ones.

I can not personally broker a deal for an open source project, because
I can not control the use and modification of the project in the open
public. I would not accept the personal liability should Xilinx think I
could even control what happens to the information after we publish
it.

So public discussion, that all can use is the only productive forum
for open source uses.


Article: 96123
Subject: Re: So Xilinx, is XDL and related libraries an available open source interface?
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 14:29:18 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

fpga_toys@yahoo.com wrote:
> So the question to Xilinx is, will Xilinx release the NDA restrictions
> on XDL, and the associated library interfaces so that open source tools
> can legally target ISE supported FPGAs?
> [...]
> So how about a clear definative legal statement about what are legal
> ISE interfaces for open source development.

See the thread "Xilinx Legal" started by Austin ... no more
speculation,
the answer remains no open source access.

It also means a number of projects which have been posted online are
in violation of the Xilinx EULA NDA.


Article: 96124
Subject: Re: Xilinx Legal
From: cs_posting@hotmail.com
Date: 30 Jan 2006 14:32:55 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
fpga_toys@yahoo.com wrote:

> I can not personally broker a deal for an open source project, because
> I can not control the use and modification of the project in the open
> public. I would not accept the personal liability should Xilinx think I
> could even control what happens to the information after we publish
> it.
>
> So public discussion, that all can use is the only productive forum
> for open source uses.

I think you could get the ball rolling with some email, but I agree
that all of the 'decisions' woul d have to be very public, and even
enough late-stage discussion to illuminate them, for the result to be
of any use for a free and open project.

It seems like you are hoping Xilinx legal will meet you here.  That
might be a good result, but you may have to first talk to them on their
turf to issue the invitation.




Site Home   Archive Home   FAQ Home   How to search the Archive   How to Navigate the Archive   
Compare FPGA features and resources   

Threads starting:
1994JulAugSepOctNovDec1994
1995JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1995
1996JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1996
1997JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1997
1998JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1998
1999JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1999
2000JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2000
2001JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2001
2002JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2002
2003JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2003
2004JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2004
2005JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2005
2006JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2006
2007JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2007
2008JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2008
2009JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2009
2010JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2010
2011JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2011
2012JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2012
2013JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2013
2014JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2014
2015JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2015
2016JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2016
2017JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2017
2018JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2018
2019JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2019
2020JanFebMarAprMay2020

Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Custom Search