Derate Policy & Approval: Mechanism

Mechanism to understand

Mechanism for Derate Policy & Approval focuses on approved derate set, waiver count, signoff pessimism budget. The goal is to connect the observable symptom to timing mechanism, ownership, and regression risk.

Derating policy is a contractual margin between implementation and signoff; changes need documented approval and regression. Think of STA as a signed contract between constraints, parasitics, and implementation — slack is the measurable outcome.

• Identify launch and capture clocks on the failing path.

• Identify path group: reg2reg, in2reg, reg2out, or async.

• Identify whether setup, hold, or both fail in the scenario.

Layered view

STA CLOSURE FLOW — Derate Policy & Approval

constraints (SDC)
        |
        v
timing graph (cell + net delays)
        |
        v
MMMC scenarios (corner x mode x view)
        |
        v
variation + SI adjustments
        |
        v
slack (WNS/TNS) -> ECO -> regression

Debug rule: always state corner, mode, view, and database tag with slack.

Derate approval flow

DERATE CHANGE REQUEST
  -> STA lead review
  -> PD director sign
  -> foundry policy check
  -> re-run full MMMC matrix
  -> archive before/after WNS

Layer responsibilities

STA OWNERSHIP LAYERS — Derate Policy & Approval

layer              owns                         failure mode
----------------   --------------------------   ---------------------
constraints        clocks, IO, exceptions       false violations
implementation     cells, nets, placement       real path delay
extraction         SPEF/RC corners              view mismatch
signoff policy     derate, MMMC matrix          margin disputes
closure           ECO order, regression        fix breaks other corner

STA deep dive

Variation policy is negotiated margin, not a tool checkbox.

Concept diagram

VARIATION STACK

nominal delay + OCV/AOCV/POCV margin = signoff delay

Metric graph

DERATE IMPACT ON WNS

OCV only     WNS -120ps
AOCV         WNS -45ps
POCV         WNS -60ps (policy dependent)

Reports and artifacts

• derate table

• AOCV depth report

• POCV sigma

• hold/setup split

Mini case study

Switched to AOCV without re-baselining hold — short paths failed min analysis.

Debug branches

• Short paths for hold

• Policy approval for derate changes

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.

Mechanism deep dive

Derating policy is a contractual margin between implementation and signoff; changes need documented approval and regression.