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
  • DFT Metrics Reference
  • DFT Glossary
  • Reading Path
  • Scan Fundamentals61
  • Compression & Diagnosis61
  • ATPG & Pattern Generation61
    • Fault Models
    • ATPG Constraints
    • Pattern Signoff
    • Coverage Closure
      • Coverage Closure: Mechanism
      • Coverage Closure: Inputs & Outputs
      • Coverage Closure: Reports & Metrics
      • Coverage Closure: Debug Playbook
      • Coverage Closure: Worked Example
      • Coverage Closure: Pitfalls & Red Flags
      • Coverage Closure: Interview Drills
      • Coverage Closure: Review Checklist
      • Coverage Closure: Theory Deep Dive
      • Coverage Closure: Design Space
      • Coverage Closure: Expanded Case Study
      • Coverage Closure: Step-by-Step Walkthrough
      • Coverage Closure: Comparison Matrix
      • Coverage Closure: Software / Programmer View
      • Coverage Closure: Silicon PPA Impact
    • ATPG & Pattern Generation: Tricky Q&A
  • MBIST & LBIST61
  • Boundary Scan & JTAG61
  • Test Timing & Power61
  • DFT Physical Integration61
  • DFT Interview Prep61
  • DFT / ATPG Cheatsheet
Loading lesson

‹Coverage Closure
  1. Topics
  2. Design for Test
  3. ATPG & Pattern Generation
  4. Coverage Closure
  5. Coverage Closure: Worked Example

DFT / ATPG · All levels

Coverage Closure: Worked Example

Worked Example for Coverage Closure.

On this page

    Worked example

    Worked Example for Coverage Closure focuses on coverage gap to target, dominant undetected classes, closure iteration count. The goal is to convert metric movement into mechanism, owner, and release decision.

    A release review shows regression on coverage gap to target, dominant undetected classes, closure iteration count. The strongest first move is to freeze evidence, isolate one failing bucket, and prove mechanism before changing flow knobs.

    Sequence under inspection

    Diagram
    DFT FLOW - Coverage Closure
    
    scan insertion -> chain stitch -> compression map -> ATPG -> tester apply -> diagnosis
          |                |                |            |             |
     controllability   shift balance    channel use   coverage     silicon correlation
    
    Primary metric: coverage gap to target, dominant undetected classes, closure iteration count

    ATPG flow

    Diagram
    fault models -> constraints -> generation -> coverage closure -> signoff
    1. Capture failing report and exact run tags.

    2. Tag scenario (mode, lot/corner, pattern class).

    3. Trace first dependency that changed.

    4. Compare against coverage gap report, undetected fault buckets, closure action tracker.

    5. Choose one reversible fix and predefine regression checks.

    Did the fix work?

    Diagram
    BEFORE / AFTER - Coverage Closure
    
    metric quality
      ^
      |                    --- release target
      |      o regressed
      |           o baseline
      |                o after fix
      +-------------------------------> closure iteration
    
    Prove quality, timing, and test-power all moved safely.

    DFT deep dive

    ATPG quality comes from fault model choice plus legal constraints, not raw pattern volume alone.

    Concept diagram

    Diagram
    ATPG FLOW
    
    fault model -> constraints -> generation -> simulation -> coverage closure -> signoff

    Metric graph

    Diagram
    COVERAGE GAP
    
    target coverage
      ^
      |      o before closure
      |          o after fixes
      +---------------------> iteration

    Reports and artifacts

    • fault model coverage

    • untestable class report

    • constraint legality errors

    • pattern signoff memo

    Mini case study

    Transition coverage stalled due to clock constraints mismatch; updated at-speed capture definitions recovered target.

    Debug branches

    • Classify untestable faults

    • Diff ATPG constraints each run

    • Pair coverage with pattern budget

    Senior review question

    Ask: what evidence proves this DFT decision is safe for production?

    Key takeaways

    • State metric, lot/corner context, and pattern tag with every claim.

    • Treat timing, power, and quality as one signoff problem.

    Common pitfalls

    • Chasing coverage without legality checks.

    • Ignoring test-power side effects of pattern changes.

    • Debugging silicon without reproducible tags.

    Principal DFT review addendum

    Coverage closure uses targeted analysis of undetected faults, constraints, and design-for-test hooks to close quality gaps without exploding pattern volume.

    Metric: coverage gap to target, dominant undetected classes, closure iteration count

    This content block can't be displayed here.

    Block type: unknown

    This content block can't be displayed here.

    Block type: unknown

    This content block can't be displayed here.

    Block type: unknown

    Previous

    176 / 493

    Next: Coverage Closure: Pitfalls & Red Flags

    Up next

    Up nextCoverage Closure: Pitfalls & Red Flags

    Sign in to save progress

    Practice this lessonReport an error

    See also

    • Coverage Closure: Mechanism
    • Coverage Closure: Inputs & Outputs
    • Coverage Closure: Reports & Metrics