Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.09156

Compiling Semi-Ring Dynamic Programming to Tier-Aware 3D-DRAM Processing-in-Memory

Mahbod Afarin·Tsung-Han Lu·Tajana Rosing
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Processing-in-Memory (PIM) on monolithic 3D (M3D) DRAM is a promising answer to the memory wall for data-intensive dynamic programming (DP), yet extracting its performance today demands hand-written kernels: the programmer must pick a tile size, place data across non-uniform-latency memory tiers, partition work between heterogeneous processing units, and insert the right broadcasts and queues by hand. We present GenMLIR, an MLIR compiler that automates this mapping for tier-aware 3D PIM. GenMLIR encodes the semi-ring generalized grid update, the algebraic form shared by all-pairs shortest path (APSP) and sequence alignment, as a first-class IR abstraction, and lowers it through four GenDRAM-aware pass groups that derive blocked tiling, tier-aware placement, tile-to-PU assignment, and explicit communication. We also characterize precisely which DP recurrences the abstraction admits and which it does not. On the GenDRAM architecture, GenMLIR-generated code runs up to 5.8 (APSP) and 16.7 (alignment) faster than a lowering without compiler support, and 1.2-1.4 faster than a standard affine-tiling PIM compiler we also implement, reaching 90-100% of an achievable-performance bound. It expresses these workloads in 4-9 lines instead of 300-500 and compiles in a negligible fraction of runtime.

Explore related subjects

cs.AR

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mahbod Afarin, Tsung-Han Lu, Tajana Rosing. 2026-10-06. Compiling Semi-Ring Dynamic Programming to Tier-Aware 3D-DRAM Processing-in-Memory. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.09156

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

EdgeCIM: A Hardware-Software Co-Design for CIM-Based Acceleration of Small Language Models

The growing demand for deploying Small Language Models (SLMs) on edge devices, including laptops, smartphones, automotive and robotic computing platforms, and high-performance embedded systems, has exposed fundamental inefficiencies in existing accelerators. While GPUs handle prefill workloads efficiently, the autoregressive decoding phase is dominated by GEMV operations that are inherently memory-bound, resulting in poor utilization and prohibitive energy costs at the edge. In this work, we present EdgeCIM, a hardware-software co-design framework for accelerating autoregressive decoding of SLMs on edge devices in latency-critical applications. At its core is a CIM macro, implemented in 65 nm, coupled with a tile-based mapping strategy that balances pipeline stages, maximizing parallelism while alleviating DRAM bandwidth bottlenecks. Our simulator enables design space exploration of SLMs up to 4B parameters, identifying hardware configurations that optimize latency and energy according to a configurable objective function. On LLaMA3.2 3B (INT4), EdgeCIM achieves 1.76x and 3.21x higher throughput than NVIDIA Jetson AGX Orin and Orin Nano Super operating in MAXN mode, respectively, and 7.07x higher throughput than Qualcomm's Snapdragon-X Elite. Extensive benchmarks on TinyLLaMA 1.1B, LLaMA3.2 (1B, 3B), Phi 3.5 mini 3.8B, Qwen2.5 (0.5B, 1.5B, 3B), SmolLM2 1.7B, SmolLM3 3B, and Qwen3 (0.6B, 1.7B, 4B) reveal that our accelerator, at INT4 precision, achieves on average 336.4 tokens/s and 173 tokens/J. These results establish EdgeCIM as a compelling solution towards real-time, energy-efficient, latency-critical SLM inference at the edge.

cs.AR↗
arXiv2026

A State Augmented Approach to Paralle Modeling in High-Level Synthesis

High-level synthesis (HLS) can schedule only the concurrency made legal by its input description. For feedback-coupled designs, a sequential behavioral model can obscure the architectural state boundaries and hazard resolution needed for efficient overlap. We develop an explicit architectural modeling methodology based on synchronous sequential processes that start in lockstep and synchronize completion before repeating. Persistent state, communication, and feedback control are represented in C++, while HLS schedules and binds operations within that structure. A five-stage RV32I processor illustrates three consequential modeling decisions: which version of a value a consumer reads, when it consumes that value, and how architectural memory actions map to port operations. On a Kintex UltraScale+ FPGA, the CPI-optimized configuration achieves 1.221 cycles per instruction at 220 MHz, compared with 4.000 for an algorithmic HLS baseline and 1.575 at 242 MHz for an Ibex reference. An area-optimized configuration reduces LUTs by 65\% and registers by 47\%, with 9.7\% more benchmark cycles and a 250 MHz achieved clock. These results demonstrate a separation between designer-controlled architecture and tool-controlled scheduling.

cs.AR↗
arXiv2026

Comparative Analysis of Large Load Interconnection Requirements Across U.S. Transmission Entities

The rapid growth of large loads, especially data centers driven by artificial intelligence, is creating unprecedented demands on the North American electric grid. Data centers now account for nearly 80% of large load interconnection requests in the Western Interconnection, and U.S. electricity consumption from data centers is projected to reach 325-580 TWh by 2028. Despite this urgency, technical interconnection requirements for large loads have not yet matured and still contain several gaps. This paper presents a comparative analysis of large load interconnection requirements across eleven U.S. entities, including AEP, Ameren, CAISO, Dominion, Duke Energy, ERCOT, LIPA, MISO, PJM, Southern Company, and SPP, under seven technical categories: large load definition, load data and modeling, fault ride-through, load curtailment and shedding, dispatchability, power quality, and reactive power control. The analysis reveals significant variation in both the scope and specificity of requirements. LIPA addresses all seven technical categories at least partially, while Dominion and Duke Energy provide detailed coverage across nearly all categories. The analysis also finds that data center applicants can be viewed as potential grid resources, rather than only as consumers. The findings provide a structured baseline from which utilities, regulators, ISOs/RTOs, and developers can identify gaps, benchmark against peers, and accelerate the development of interconnection standards.

cs.AR↗