Strategic planning for HDL development: identify the item that is not a strategic-planning step During upfront strategic planning of an HDL system, which of the following is not a strategic step, but rather a detailed specification activity?

Introduction / Context:
Successful HDL projects begin with strategy: verification approach, integration plan, and functional definitions. Some details—such as exact signal names—are important, but they belong to lower-level specification and coding standards rather than strategy.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Strategic planning emphasizes testability, modular integration, and clear functional definition.
• Signal naming is crucial but is a documentation/coding convention step.
• We aim to separate strategic concerns from implementation details.

Concept / Approach:
Strategy ensures that each block can be verified independently and integrated cleanly. Functional behavior must be understood to prevent rework. Exact names can be assigned later or evolve with the design without changing the strategy.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Typical design flows: strategy → requirements/architecture → interface spec (names) → RTL coding → verification.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• A: Test plans and DFT are strategic.
• B: Architectural fit and interfaces are strategic.
• D: Thorough functional definition is strategic.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing naming conventions with architectural strategy; keep documentation flexible early on.

Final Answer:
The names of each input and output must be known.