Synchronizer Selection Guide: Design Space

Design space exploration

For Synchronizer Selection Guide, signoff options trade reliability, latency, and schedule.

Option A — conservative

• Conservative synchronization: helps robustness

• Risk: latency increase

• Validate with: stress regressions

Option B — balanced

• Balanced protocol design: helps throughput + safety

• Risk: higher design effort

• Validate with: formal + simulation

Option C — aggressive

• Aggressive waiver posture: helps schedule relief

• Risk: escape risk

• Validate with: periodic waiver audit

Option D — refactor

• Architectural refactor: helps long-term safety

• Risk: schedule hit

• Validate with: system bring-up

DESIGN SPACE — Synchronizer Selection Guide
robustness <-> latency <-> complexity <-> schedule

Design pitfalls

• Waive-first behavior

• No owner for residual risk

Tradeoff curve

BEFORE / AFTER — Synchronizer Selection Guide

open critical issues
  ^
  |  o baseline
  |     o after fix batch
  |         o after protocol proof
  |             o signoff-ready
  +---------------------------------> closure iteration

Track issue burn-down with evidence quality, not only count.

CDC/RDC deep dive

Metastability is managed risk, not eliminated risk.

Concept diagram

METASTABILITY FLOW

async event -> first sample may metastabilize
 -> settle window
 -> downstream sample confidence

Metric graph

MTBF TREND

target MTBF ---------
current design   ____/

Reports and artifacts

• MTBF assumptions

• synchronizer inventory

• crossing class summary

• critical waivers

Mini case study

Pulse sync chosen for a level signal caused intermittent stuck state under voltage stress.

Debug branches

• Validate crossing class first

• Check pulse width assumptions

• Audit synchronizer template usage

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

Crossing intent (level, pulse, bus, control/data coupling) determines legal synchronization topology and verification evidence.

Metric: crossing class coverage, incorrect pattern usage rate, waiver count