STA Mastery · All levels
Setup / Hold Closure Order: Silicon PPA Impact
Silicon PPA Impact for Setup / Hold Closure Order.
Silicon PPA and closure impact
Sizing, VT, skew, and route each have PPA side effects.
Area drivers
Upsize cells
Buffer insertion
Shield wires
Power drivers
VT swap leakage
Clock tree power for skew
Timing impact
Net delay on critical routes
SI delta delay
PD consequences
Congestion limits sizing
Layer promotion for nets
Verification burden
ECO equivalence
SI re-signoff
PPA — Setup / Hold Closure Order
area/power/timing/closure-time tradeoffPPA takeaways
ECO has PPA cost
Signoff is multi-corner
Design option PPA snapshot
BEFORE / AFTER ECO — Setup / Hold Closure Order
WNS (ps)
0 | --- target
-50 | ● regressed
-80 | ● before ECO
-20 | ● after ECO
+-------------------------------> ECO iteration
Prove setup AND hold moved safely.STA deep dive
ECO without regression is a coin flip.
Concept diagram
ECO LOOP
failing path -> fix -> setup check -> hold check -> SI -> MMMC matrixMetric graph
ECO PROGRESS
WNS
0 | o target
-50| o
-100| o baseline
+-----------------> ECO #Reports and artifacts
pre/post WNS
hold delta
leakage delta
ECO ticket log
Mini case study
48-hour tapeout crunch: VT swap fixed setup; hold fixed with route on short path — order mattered.
Debug branches
Never ship setup-only proof
Logical ECO needs equivalence
Senior review question
Ask: what corner/mode/view proves this topic is closed or failing?
Key takeaways
State corner, mode, view, and database tag with every slack claim.
Run setup and hold plus MMMC regression after every ECO.
Common pitfalls
Comparing STA runs with different SPEF or SDC tags.
Broad false_path to green-wash violations.
Setup-only ECO without hold check.
Principal STA review addendum
Setup and hold compete through delay changes; closure order and ECO type must avoid fixing one at the expense of the other.
Metric: setup WNS, hold WNS, simultaneous violation count