CDC / RDC · All levels

CDC Review Gate: Comparison Matrix

Comparison Matrix for CDC Review Gate.

Comparison matrix

Aggressive waivers reduce schedule pressure but increase silicon risk.

diagram
+------------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Approach         | Strength       | Weakness       | Best when      |
+------------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Conservative     | safe           | extra latency  | high-risk crossings |
| Balanced         | practical      | more setup     | most production paths |
| Aggressive       | fast schedule  | escape risk    | late-stage crunch |
| Refactor         | structural gain | long cycle     | recurring failures |
+------------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+

When to choose each approach

  • Select approach by silicon risk, not only schedule urgency

Interview traps

  • Global waiver spray

  • Unproven protocol assumptions

Evidence comparison

diagram
CDC/RDC EVIDENCE MATRIX — CDC Review Gate

+-----------------------+----------------------------+----------------------------+---------------------------+
| Evidence              | Tells you                  | Does not prove             | Next action               |
+-----------------------+----------------------------+----------------------------+---------------------------+
| structural report     | crossing topology class    | protocol liveness          | add assertions/formal     |
| reset map             | release dependencies       | dynamic startup behavior   | run reset stress tests    |
| formal proof          | bounded safety/liveness    | real firmware sequence     | correlate with simulation |
| simulation stress     | observed mode behavior     | full state-space closure   | target unhit corners      |
| waiver log            | accepted residual risk     | technical correctness      | periodic revalidation     |
+-----------------------+----------------------------+----------------------------+---------------------------+

CDC/RDC deep dive

Signoff is an evidence governance problem across teams.

Concept diagram

diagram
CDC SIGNOFF LOOP

analysis -> triage -> fix/waive -> review gate -> dashboard

Metric graph

diagram
CRITICAL OPEN COUNT

week1 34
week2 22
week3 10
week4 0

Reports and artifacts

  • critical by owner

  • waiver quality

  • review gate status

  • closure trend

Mini case study

Pass rates improved while critical waivers aged out of policy; dashboard exposed hidden risk.

Debug branches

  • Separate quality from quantity metrics

  • enforce waiver expiry

  • run gate checklists consistently

Senior review question

Ask: what evidence proves this risk is closed for silicon, not just tool-clean?

Key takeaways

  • State crossing class, assumptions, and owner with every issue.

  • Run structural and dynamic regressions after each fix.

Common pitfalls

  • Treating all warnings as equivalent risk.

  • Waiving issues without containment evidence.

  • Skipping reset and reconvergence stress after CDC fixes.

Principal CDC/RDC review addendum

Gate reviews align RTL, verification, and signoff evidence before integration milestones to avoid endgame metastability surprises.

Metric: gate pass rate, late-stage CDC churn, review defect leakage