Skip to content

ROBs in Streamer for MemPool integration#64

Open
mbertuletti wants to merge 8 commits into
develfrom
mbertuletti/outstanding-on-devel
Open

ROBs in Streamer for MemPool integration#64
mbertuletti wants to merge 8 commits into
develfrom
mbertuletti/outstanding-on-devel

Conversation

@mbertuletti

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This PR adds to RedMulE's streaming the reordering logic needed for the integration in MemPool.
Additionally a tiler feature is added, to start computing from any column in W and loop-back once over.

@mbertuletti
mbertuletti marked this pull request as ready for review July 17, 2026 09:34
@FrancescoConti

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Ciao @mbertuletti thanks for the PR! I see it already passes CI tests flawlessly, and code-wise I have no particular comment. I am interested in understanding a bit better the loopback feature however, it's not super clear to me.

@mbertuletti

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Ciao @mbertuletti thanks for the PR! I see it already passes CI tests flawlessly, and code-wise I have no particular comment. I am interested in understanding a bit better the loopback feature however, it's not super clear to me.

Ciao @FrancescoConti, sure! I give you a motivation and overview. In TensorPool multiple RedMulE can fetch at the same time from the TCDM. According to the parallelization scheme W is shared, meaning that the RedMulEs will all start fetching the same column of W, creating contentions in the interconnect.

Therefore, I added the option to specify that you want to compute starting from another column (let's say index i out of P total columns). Then you need to compute up to column P-1 and "loopback" to column 0 to complete the computation up to column (i-1). In practice, this is implemented in the Tiler, by adding a loopback state.

The details are in this paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.02291

@FrancescoConti

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Ok - interesting. It makes sense to me. I would add two points (one may actually be already there):

  1. is the loopback feature "guarded" by EnableReordering?
  2. do you think it is possible to add one or more regression tests specifically for EnableReordering and loopback? Because I fear otherwise we may lose it with subsequent PRs / commits. Of course, if this is too heavy, it may also be done in a future PR (perhaps keeping track of it an issue).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants