Inputs and outputs contract

Inputs & Outputs for Package Test Interface focuses on pin mux correctness, package test mode coverage, board bring-up escape count. The goal is to convert metric movement into mechanism, owner, and release decision.

Treat these as a release contract. Ambiguity here creates expensive debug loops because teams optimize against different assumptions.

INPUTS
  - scan/ATPG architecture and constraints
  - fault model and quality target policy
  - pattern generation config + tester limits
  - timing/power/physical assumptions

OUTPUTS
  - quality metrics and closure status
  - signed artifacts and owner approvals
  - diagnosis evidence for residual risk
  - release, waiver, or escalation decision

Flow sequence

DFT FLOW - Package Test Interface

scan insertion -> chain stitch -> compression map -> ATPG -> tester apply -> diagnosis
      |                |                |            |             |
 controllability   shift balance    channel use   coverage     silicon correlation

Primary metric: pin mux correctness, package test mode coverage, board bring-up escape count

Ownership map

OWNERSHIP MAP - Package Test Interface

artifact              owner
----------------      -----------------
architecture/report package owner
constraints/setup   board owner
physical/test       DFT lead

Name an owner for each failing metric cluster.

DFT deep dive

Boundary scan and JTAG are board-level contracts, not just RTL features.

Concept diagram

JTAG ACCESS

TAP controller -> instruction register -> boundary/data register -> board test/debug

Metric graph

BOARD TEST READINESS

instruction coverage vs pin controllability

Reports and artifacts

• TAP compliance report

• boundary cell coverage matrix

• EXTEST/INTEST results

• debug lock policy log

Mini case study

Board bring-up blocked by pinmux override in one mode; TAP instruction decode and package table alignment fixed path.

Debug branches

• Verify TAP state transitions

• Audit package pin ownership

• Check security lifecycle lock behavior

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

Package and board interfaces determine whether intended boundary and test modes can be exercised without conflicting with functional muxing.

Metric: pin mux correctness, package test mode coverage, board bring-up escape count