CDC / RDC · All levels
CDC/RDC Whiteboard Framework: Comparison Matrix
Comparison Matrix for CDC/RDC Whiteboard Framework.
Comparison matrix
Interview responses must balance depth, clarity, and tradeoff judgment.
+------------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| 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
CDC/RDC EVIDENCE MATRIX — CDC/RDC Whiteboard Framework
+-----------------------+----------------------------+----------------------------+---------------------------+
| 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
Interview performance reflects production signoff thinking quality.
Concept diagram
INTERVIEW FLOW
classify -> explain mechanism -> propose fix -> state regressionMetric 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.