Skip to content
DenseChip
Learn
PracticeCode labInterview

DenseChip

Navigate

Menu

LearnPracticeCode labInterview

Tools

All toolsSV editorCode repoResume
DenseChip

Practice, courses, and chip-design tools in one focused workspace.

LearnPracticeCode labInterviewToolsLearning paths

© 2026 DenseChip

AboutContactPrivacyTerms
Skip to lesson

Course contents

  • How to Use This Course
  • Reading Path
  • CDC/RDC Glossary
  • CDC/RDC Metrics Reference
  • CDC/RDC Interview Prep
  • CDC/RDC Signoff Cheatsheet
  • Clock Domains and Failure Modes8
  • Metastability and Synchronizers16
  • CDC Protocols and Handshakes16
  • Reconvergence and Gray Coding16
  • Reset Domain Crossing16
  • Architecture and Design Rules16
    • CDC-Aware Partitioning
    • Clock Gating and Muxing
    • Interface and IP Rules
      • IP and Macro Boundaries
      • Async Interfaces: Config and Status
      • Documenting Crossings
      • Interface Checklists
    • Quasi-Static Signals and Configuration
  • CDC Signoff Methodology24
  • RDC Signoff16
  • Debug and Case Studies11
  • CDC and RDC Interview Prep30
  • Capstone: Sign Off a Multi-clock Peripheral4
Loading lesson

‹Interface and IP Rules
  1. Topics
  2. CDC & RDC
  3. Architecture and Design Rules
  4. Interface and IP Rules
  5. Interface Checklists

Part 6 · Architecture and Design Rules · Intermediate

Interface Checklists

A checklist table for IP integration and handoff.

On this page

    Checklists turn the rules of the previous three lessons into a repeatable gate: the same questions at every integration, the same evidence at every handoff. Copy these tables into the project review template; a row answered “not applicable” needs the reason written beside it.

    IP integration checklist

    #

    Check

    Evidence

    I-1

    Every clock and reset pin is connected to a named domain; no clock pin is tied to another clock “because the frequencies match”.

    Connectivity list against the domain diagram.

    I-2

    Every boundary signal has an inventory row with direction, type, protocol, and owner.

    Inventory extract for the interface.

    I-3

    Crossings claimed inside the macro have provider evidence attached.

    Report or certificate reference, not a paraphrase.

    I-4

    Crossings not evidenced inside sit in visible integrator logic.

    Module names in the inventory rows.

    I-5

    Pulse widths and stability assumptions from the provider are met by the integrator drivers.

    Assertions or directed simulation results.

    I-6

    Reset sequencing across the boundary is specified and simulated.

    Sequence plus a reset-interrupt test result.

    Handoff checklist (provider to integrator)

    #

    Check

    Evidence

    H-1

    Interface specification written to the documenting-crossings template.

    The document itself.

    H-2

    Crossing list complete: every boundary signal appears with protocol and assumptions.

    Review sign-off on the list.

    H-3

    Constraints needed at the boundary are delivered with the IP.

    Constraint sketch with each assumption traceable to the document.

    H-4

    Known limitations and waiver requests are listed with justification.

    One entry per waiver, with expiry and owner.

    H-5

    A minimal integration testbench exercising every crossing exists and passes.

    Testbench location and result.

    How the review uses them

    The reviewer does not re-derive the design from the RTL; they walk the checklists and read the evidence column. A row with no evidence is an open item with an owner and a date, tracked like any other signoff item. Two consecutive clean integrations do not retire the checklist: interfaces change, and the list is what catches the change.

    Interview

    “How do you review third-party IP for CDC?” Ask for the crossing list and the evidence behind each row, place visible synchronisers wherever evidence is missing, and check clocks, resets, assumptions, and reset sequencing against these two tables.

    Check yourself Integration passes I-1 to I-5 but I-6 has no evidence yet, and schedule pressure suggests signing off without it. What is the specific risk?

    An untested reset sequence across the boundary: resets that release in the wrong order or into a stopped clock corrupt state silently and escape functional simulation, which is exactly the class of bug the checklist exists to catch.

    Related topics

    • IP and Macro Boundaries

    • Documenting Crossings

    Previous

    90 / 179

    Next: Quasi-Static Signals and Configuration

    Up next

    Up nextQuasi-Static Signals and Configuration

    Sign in to save progress

    Practice this lessonReport an error

    See also

    • IP and Macro Boundaries
    • Async Interfaces: Config and Status