Part 11 · Senior Prep · Intermediate

Sign-Off Metrics Dashboard: Evidence for Tape-Out

Building closure scorecards — functional vs code coverage, trend lines, waiver audit trail, and the metrics verification leads expect at sign-off.

Leads want trends, not snapshots

A sign-off dashboard shows merged functional coverage % by plan section , open hole count by priority, waiver inventory with approvers, code coverage trend, and day-over-day delta. Single-number hero metrics hide regressions.

diagram
[CLOSE][SENIOR][UVM] sign-off scorecard layout

  ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
  │  MILESTONE: M4 Closure          DATE: 2026-06-10             │
  ├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
  │  Plan Section      Func Cov   Holes(P0/P1)   Waivers        │
  │  AXI Protocol        98.2%      1 / 3          2           │
  │  Interrupt Ctrl      100%       0 / 0          0           │
  │  Security IP          94.1%      2 / 8          5           │
  ├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
  │  Code Line Cov: 91.3%   Toggle: 87.2%   FSM: 96.0%          │
  │  7-day func cov delta: +2.1%   Coverage regressions: 0      │
  └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Waiver audit fields

  • Plan feature ID and exact bin/cross name.

  • Rationale citing spec section or design limitation.

  • Approver name and date (verification + design).

  • Expiry or revisit milestone if implementation may change.

diagram
[CLOSE][SENIOR] waiver record template

  WAIVER-ID: W-AXI-030-001
  Bin:       axi_cov.x_wr_large.wr_large (partial — large WR via narrow port only)
  Rationale: FEAT-AXI-030 N/A when DATA_WIDTH=32 per spec §4.2.1
  Approved:  design lead + verification lead
  Revisit:   never | next milestone | if DATA_WIDTH changes

Key takeaways

  • Dashboard = functional coverage by plan section + hole priority + waivers.

  • Trend lines expose plateaus and regressions snapshots hide.

  • Waivers are audited records — ID, rationale, approver, revisit.

Common pitfalls

  • Quoting code coverage as sign-off while functional holes remain.

  • Waivers without design approval — audit failure at tape-out review.

  • No delta column — team cannot tell if closure stalled.


report_phase summary for milestones

Aggregate per-component coverage summaries in env report_phase for human-readable logs; the dashboard pulls from merged databases:

systemverilog
function void report_phase(uvm_phase phase);
  super.report_phase(phase);
  `uvm_info("SIGNOFF",
    $sformatf("merged_func_cov=%0.1f%% open_p0_holes=%0d waivers=%0d",
      env.get_merged_func_cov(), env.count_p0_holes(), env.count_waivers()),
    UVM_LOW)
endfunction

Sign-off meeting checklist

  1. All P0 plan features covered or waived with approval.

  2. No coverage regressions in last 7-day merge trend.

  3. Closure tests documented in regression manifest with goal IDs.

  4. Known limitations listed explicitly — not buried in waiver footnotes.

Key takeaways

  • Sign-off is a package: metrics + waivers + manifest + known limits.

  • P0 holes block sign-off; P1 may be milestone-negotiated.

Common pitfalls

  • Presenting dashboard without linking to reproducible seeds/tests.

  • Hiding open P0 holes under aggregate % that looks green.