Litigation Settlements and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Mar. 30, 2019
Loss Contingency [Abstract]
Litigation Settlements and Contingencies	Litigation Settlements and Contingencies Patent Litigation On February 1, 2017, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed by Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 (IP Bridge) against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. Xilinx, Inc., Case. No. 2:17-cv-00100). The lawsuit pertains to two patents and IP Bridge seeks unspecified damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, costs, and a permanent injunction or an on-going royalty. On September 14, 2017, the court granted the Company’s motion to transfer venue to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. On December 21, 2018, the parties reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit, pursuant to which the parties entered into a patent license agreement dated as of the same date. The patent license agreement does not have a material impact on the Company's financial position or results of operations. On March 17, 2017, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed by Anza Technology, Inc. (Anza) against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Anza Technology, Inc. v. Xilinx, Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-00687). The lawsuit pertains to three patents and Anza seeks unspecified damages, attorney fees, interest, costs, and expenses. On October 27, 2017, the court granted the Company’s motion to transfer venue to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The parties reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit and it was dismissed with prejudice on July 23, 2018. The amount of the settlement did not have a material impact on the Company's financial position or results of operations. The Company intends to continue to protect and defend our IP vigorously. Other Matters On June 11, 2015, John P. Neblett, as Chapter 7 Trustee of Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc., filed a complaint against Xilinx and others in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Bankruptcy No. 1:13-bk-05253-JJT). The complaint alleges causes of actions against Xilinx for negligence and civil conspiracy relating to alleged violations of U.S. export laws. It seeks at least $50.0 million in damages, together with punitive damages, from the defendants. On September 21, 2015, the action was withdrawn from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. On November 2, 2015, Xilinx, along with other defendants, filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On November 3, 2015, Xilinx filed a motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. On June 27, 2016, the Court denied both motions. On September 11, 2017, Xilinx, along with other defendants, filed motions for summary judgment seeking to dispose of all claims against them. On July 3, 2018, the Court granted both of Xilinx’s Motions for Summary Judgment, disposing of all claims asserted against Xilinx. On August 1, 2018, the Trustee filed a Notice of Appeal. On August 9, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued an Order to Show Cause requesting that the appellant address a possible jurisdictional defect. On August 29, 2018, the appellant responded to the Order to Show Cause. On September 10, 2018, appellees, including Xilinx, filed a joint reply. On January 7, 2019, the Court of Appeals issued an order dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. On February 19, 2019, the District Court issued an order permitting any party seeking to certify the case for appeal to file a motion. On March 11, 2019, defendant Avnet filed a motion to certify the case for appeal. The Court has not yet ruled on Avnet’s motion. From time to time, the Company is involved in various disputes and litigation matters that arise in the ordinary course of its business. These include disputes and lawsuits related to intellectual property, mergers and acquisitions, licensing, contract law, tax, regulatory, distribution arrangements, employee relations and other matters. Periodically, the Company reviews the status of each matter and assesses its potential financial exposure. If the potential loss from any claim or legal proceeding is considered probable and a range of possible losses can be estimated, the Company accrues a liability for the estimated loss. Legal proceedings are subject to uncertainties, and the outcomes are difficult to predict. Because of such uncertainties, accruals are based only on the best information available at the time. As additional information becomes available, the Company continues to reassess the potential liability related to pending claims and litigation and may revise estimates.

Litigation Settlements and Contingencies

Patent Litigation

On February 1, 2017, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed by Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 (IP Bridge) against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. Xilinx, Inc., Case. No. 2:17-cv-00100). The lawsuit pertains to two patents and IP Bridge seeks unspecified damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, costs, and a permanent injunction or an on-going royalty. On September 14, 2017, the court granted the Company’s motion to transfer venue to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. On December 21, 2018, the parties reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit, pursuant to which the parties entered into a patent license agreement dated as of the same date. The patent license agreement does not have a material impact on the Company's financial position or results of operations.

On March 17, 2017, a patent infringement lawsuit was filed by Anza Technology, Inc. (Anza) against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Anza Technology, Inc. v. Xilinx, Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-00687). The lawsuit pertains to three patents and Anza seeks unspecified damages, attorney fees, interest, costs, and expenses. On October 27, 2017, the court granted the Company’s motion to transfer venue to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The parties reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit and it was dismissed with prejudice on July 23, 2018. The amount of the settlement did not have a material impact on the Company's financial position or results of operations.

The Company intends to continue to protect and defend our IP vigorously.

Other Matters

On June 11, 2015, John P. Neblett, as Chapter 7 Trustee of Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc., filed a complaint against Xilinx and others in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Bankruptcy No. 1:13-bk-05253-JJT). The complaint alleges causes of actions against Xilinx for negligence and civil conspiracy relating to alleged violations of U.S. export laws. It seeks at least $50.0 million in damages, together with punitive damages, from the defendants. On September 21, 2015, the action was withdrawn from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. On November 2, 2015, Xilinx, along with other defendants, filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On November 3, 2015, Xilinx filed a motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. On June 27, 2016, the Court denied both motions. On September 11, 2017, Xilinx, along with other defendants, filed motions for summary judgment seeking to dispose of all claims against them. On July 3, 2018, the Court granted both of Xilinx’s Motions for Summary Judgment, disposing of all claims asserted against Xilinx. On August 1, 2018, the Trustee filed a Notice of Appeal. On August 9, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued an Order to Show Cause requesting that the appellant address a possible jurisdictional defect. On August 29, 2018, the appellant responded to the Order to Show Cause. On September 10, 2018, appellees, including Xilinx, filed a joint reply. On January 7, 2019, the Court of Appeals issued an order dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. On February 19, 2019, the District Court issued an order permitting any party seeking to certify the case for appeal to file a motion. On March 11, 2019, defendant Avnet filed a motion to certify the case for appeal. The Court has not yet ruled on Avnet’s motion.

From time to time, the Company is involved in various disputes and litigation matters that arise in the ordinary course of its business. These include disputes and lawsuits related to intellectual property, mergers and acquisitions, licensing, contract law, tax, regulatory, distribution arrangements, employee relations and other matters. Periodically, the Company reviews the status of each matter and assesses its potential financial exposure. If the potential loss from any claim or legal proceeding is considered probable and a range of possible losses can be estimated, the Company accrues a liability for the estimated loss. Legal proceedings are subject to uncertainties, and the outcomes are difficult to predict. Because of such uncertainties, accruals are based only on the best information available at the time. As additional information becomes available, the Company continues to reassess the potential liability related to pending claims and litigation and may revise estimates.