CDC/RDC Interview Q&A Bank: Software / Programmer View

RTL / implementation view

Whiteboard quality improves with repeatable decomposition flow.

What designers feel

• Intermittent sync failure

• mode-dependent startup hangs

RTL structure impact

• state machine handshake discipline

• reset release assumptions

• cross-domain data packaging

Synthesis interaction

• retiming can invalidate implicit assumptions

• lint clean does not imply CDC-safe

RTL-side mitigations

• explicit synchronizer wrappers

• protocol assertions

• reset sequence tests

RTL VIEW — CDC/RDC Interview Q&A Bank
// ensure crossing intent and protocol assumptions are explicit in module contract

Implementation layers touched

CDC/RDC OWNERSHIP LAYERS — CDC/RDC Interview Q&A Bank

layer                 owns                            common failure
------------------    -----------------------------   -----------------------------
design intent         crossing architecture           wrong topology selected
protocol semantics    req/ack, fifo, ordering        liveness/deadlock bugs
reset behavior        assert/deassert sequencing      boot instability
analysis setup        tool rules + waivers            false confidence
signoff governance    risk acceptance + dashboard     stale critical waivers

CDC/RDC deep dive

Interview performance reflects production signoff thinking quality.

Concept diagram

INTERVIEW FLOW

classify -> explain mechanism -> propose fix -> state regression

Metric graph

PRACTICE SCORE

session1 62%
session2 78%
session3 89%

Reports and artifacts

• scenario completion

• answer rubric scores

• trap recovery quality

Mini case study

Candidate gave command-heavy answer but missed risk framing and waiver governance.

Debug branches

• Use mechanism-first structure

• name ownership and evidence

• close with signoff decision

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.