Synthesis & Logic Optimization · All levels

PPA Tradeoff Playbook: Step-by-Step Walkthrough

Step-by-Step Walkthrough for PPA Tradeoff Playbook.

Step-by-step analysis walkthrough

Use when you own PPA Tradeoff Playbook in a synthesis closure review.

  1. Confirm exact run context (RTL/SDC/lib/switch set).

  2. Open section QoR dashboard and identify first drift.

  3. Inspect topic-level report for mechanism evidence.

  4. Determine owner and candidate reversible action.

  5. Apply one change only; avoid bundled fixes.

  6. Run full timing/area/power checks.

  7. Validate side effects on neighboring path groups.

  8. Publish memo with outcome and residual risk.

Artifacts to collect

  • PPA matrix, QoR comparison table, decision memo

  • QoR dashboard

  • run manifest

  • constraint diff

  • regression matrix

Decision memo template

diagram
SYNTHESIS DECISION MEMO — PPA Tradeoff Playbook
run context:
observed metric:
hypothesis:
fix:
regression:
owners: synthesis lead, program owner, PD owner

Reference visuals

PPA Pareto board

diagram
option A: timing-first
option B: balanced
option C: power-first
choose Pareto point + regression budget

Synthesis deep dive

PPA closure is a constrained tradeoff problem, not a timing-only exercise.

Concept diagram

diagram
PPA TRIAD

timing target <-> power budget <-> area cap

Metric graph

diagram
PARETO PROGRESSION

early runs      o o
balanced point    o
over-tuned          o (risk)

Reports and artifacts

  • VT mix

  • leakage trend

  • dynamic power trend

  • PPA Pareto table

Mini case study

LVT-heavy fix recovered setup but violated leakage target; balanced VT strategy closed both.

Debug branches

  • Timing-only claims need power check

  • Validate hold on VT swaps

  • Use Pareto memo

Senior review question

Ask: what evidence proves this QoR move is real and stable?

Key takeaways

  • State exact run context (RTL, SDC, libs, switches) with every QoR claim.

  • Re-run timing, area, and power regressions after each synthesis ECO.

Common pitfalls

  • Comparing runs with mismatched constraints or library views.

  • Timing-only fixes that violate power or area budgets.

  • Skipping equivalence checks after structural changes.

Principal synthesis review addendum

PPA closure is a constrained optimization problem: teams choose options by Pareto quality, not single-metric heroics.

Metric: area-power-timing Pareto points, closure runtime, regression stability