Bump Map & Escape Planning sits on a cross-team contract. Bump maps and escape strategy determine routability, IR quality, and package feasibility before final pad-ring freeze. Senior integrators tie every symptom to owner, baseline manifest, and measurable closure evidence.
Bump maps and escape strategy determine routability, IR quality, and package feasibility before final pad-ring freeze.
Primary metric: bump congestion, reroute churn, escape DRC violations
Primary artifact: bump map revision, escape routing plan, package feasibility report
Owners: package owner, top-level PD owner, power integrity owner
Top-level closure is a cross-domain optimization problem.
Reproducibility is part of technical correctness.
At tapeout, Bump Map & Escape Planning mistakes create high-cost escapes. Package constraints are first-order chip design inputs, not post-layout checks.
BUMP + ESCAPE
die bumps -> redistribution -> package balls
| |
power grid high-speed lane escape
Early escape planning prevents late route deadlock.Name failing milestone or gate.
Freeze manifest tags and integration baseline.
Review metric movement for bump congestion, reroute churn, escape DRC violations.
Identify first boundary where behavior diverges from contract.
Collect bump map revision, escape routing plan, package feasibility report with owner mapping.
Classify: contract bug, collateral drift, implementation issue, or governance gap.
Propose minimal fix plus full regression scope.
Top-level problems can be solved by one team in isolation.
A green local block report implies global readiness.
Waivers are harmless if schedule is tight.
Manifest discipline is process-only, not technical.
BUMP + ESCAPE
die bumps -> redistribution -> package balls
| |
power grid high-speed lane escape
Early escape planning prevents late route deadlock.SOC INTEGRATION LAYERS — Bump Map & Escape Planning
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 collapsePackage 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.
Package constraints are first-order chip design inputs, not post-layout checks.
This content block can't be displayed here.
Block type: unknown