Final closure must preserve functional and performance intent.
Boot instability
Contract drift after minor RTL change
Register defaults
interrupt behavior
clock/reset assumptions
Synth/PD assumptions can invalidate software expectations
Versioned contracts
joint hw/sw readiness reviews
HW/SW CONTRACT — Top-Level Closure Dashboard
// firmware init order must match reset/clock release assumptionsSOC INTEGRATION LAYERS — Top-Level Closure Dashboard
layer owns failure mode
----------------- --------------------------- ------------------------
architecture partition + contracts impossible budgets
ip handoff models + collateral integration mismatch
fabric/clock/reset global behavior domain deadlock
physical/package route + SI/PI + IO late closure churn
signoff process manifests + waivers non-reproducible claims
program governance owners + escalations schedule collapseSignoff confidence depends on evidence quality and reproducibility discipline.
SIGNOFF DECISION FLOW
metrics -> manifest -> waivers -> executive reviewOPEN CRITICALS OVER TIME
week1 █████████
week2 █████
week3 ██closure dashboard
signoff manifest
waiver aging report
TRR checklist
A near-tapeout risk was caught when manifest mismatch invalidated an apparently green closure report.
Validate manifest integrity
Bound waiver risk
Audit cross-domain owner approvals
Ask: what baseline, owner, and artifact prove this topic is truly closed?
State baseline manifest and owner with every closure metric.
Run cross-domain regression after every top-level fix.
Comparing results across different manifests.
Unowned issues slipping through review cycles.
Waiving risks without expiry and validation plan.
A closure dashboard unifies timing, power, DRC/LVS, CDC/RDC, and verification readiness into a decision-grade tapeout view.
Metric: open critical signoff items, closure burn-down trend
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