Review Checklist for Bump Map & Escape Planning focuses on bump congestion, reroute churn, escape DRC violations. The goal is to map symptoms to boundary contracts, owner actions, and regression-proof closure.
Baseline manifest and revision are explicit.
Boundary contracts for this topic are current and approved.
Ownership map covers all open issues.
Focused and full regression evidence both exist.
Residual risks are either closed or bounded via waiver policy.
Owners signed: package owner, top-level PD owner, power integrity owner.
OWNERSHIP MAP — Bump Map & Escape Planning
artifact owner
----------------- -----------------
primary owner package owner
co-owner top-level PD owner
review owner power integrity owner
No top-level issue should remain ownerless beyond one review cycle.Package assumptions must be treated as first-class chip constraints.
PACKAGE CO-DESIGN
die io <-> package routing <-> board constraintsPACKAGE RISK MIX
SI margin █████
power integrity ████
lane mapping ███bump map revision log
SI/PI margin report
IO co-design checklist
package bring-up failures
Link degradation on product board came from package routing assumptions not reflected in pre-silicon model.
Compare package model versions
Audit lane mapping
Correlate SI/PI margins to failures
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.
Bump maps and escape strategy determine routability, IR quality, and package feasibility before final pad-ring freeze.
Metric: bump congestion, reroute churn, escape DRC violations
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