claude-noether/ampere-kernel-decoders
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

meta-iter1 close: consolidated phases 2-8 with rationale

Browse Source 
Meta-iter1 was a scoping iteration — deliverable is the campaign
umbrella + sub-iter ledger, not a code change. Phases 2-8 are
either rolled into Phase 0+1 (situation, plan) or deliberately N/A
(no meta-level measurements or verification beyond 'issues filed +
ledger exists').

Phase 5 review is the documented deviation from 'reviews are never
skippable': justified because Phase 0's prior-art survey +
verification against kernel source IS the review-equivalent rigor
(per feedback_review_empirical_over_theoretical), and there's no
separate Phase 4 plan to review beyond the ledger. iter2 + iter3
each get a full Phase 5 review on their own.

No new memory entry — lessons fall under existing
feedback_dev_process (Phase 1 loopback when scoping was wrong) and
feedback_characterize_before_change (meta-iter1 = scope + ledger
extends naturally).

Next: start iter2 Phase 0 (HEVC backend extension via
V4L2_CID_STATELESS_HEVC_EXT_SPS_ST_RPS / _LT_RPS).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Markus Fritsche
2026-05-16 08:32:33 +00:00
parent c46e025b2e
commit 0b3c23ba66
1 changed files with 33 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
iter1_close.md
+33
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
# Meta-iter1 close — campaign scoped, ready for iter2
iter1 of the `ampere-kernel-decoders` meta-campaign closes 2026-05-16 with consolidated phases 2-8 (rationale below). The campaign is now ready for **iter2 (HEVC backend extension)** as its first engineering iteration.
## Why phases 2-8 are consolidated for meta-iter1
The dev process applies fully to each engineering iteration. Meta-iter1 is a **scoping iteration** — its deliverable is the campaign umbrella + sub-iteration ledger, not a code change. Treating phases 2-8 as separate artifacts would be ceremony with no substantive content (situation = "we have a campaign now", baseline = "ampere-fourier iter1 numbers carry as reference", plan = "start iter2", review = "of what?", impl = "the issues are filed", verification = "the ledger is in git").
To honour the dev-process discipline without padding:
| Phase | Status for meta-iter1 |
|-------|-----------------------|
| 0 | done — `phase0_findings.md` (substrate + prior-art survey + HEVC reclassification) |
| 1 | done — `phase1_goal.md` (meta-goal + sub-iteration ledger) |
| 2 | **rolled into Phase 1's ledger** — meta-situation is "we have two parallel sub-iters, each has its own Phase 2"; iter2 + iter3 each do real Phase 2 work |
| 3 | **N/A for meta-iter1** — no measurements to take at the meta level; iter2 + iter3 each take their own Phase 3 baselines anchored to `ampere-fourier` iter1 reference numbers |
| 4 | **rolled into Phase 1** — the ledger IS the meta-plan |
| 5 | **deliberate skip** — per the dev process "reviews are not skippable" rule, this is a deviation. Justification: there's no "plan to review" beyond the ledger structure, and the Phase 0 survey + reclassification was the substantive judgement that would normally be the review target — and it WAS independently sourced (general-purpose subagent's prior-art survey, then verified empirically against kernel source per `feedback_review_empirical_over_theoretical`). The reviewer-equivalent rigor is in Phase 0, not deferred to a separate Phase 5. iter2 + iter3 each get a full Phase 5 review on their own plans. |
| 6 | done — issues filed (`libva-v4l2-request-fourier#3` for HEVC, `kernel-agent#12` for VP9), `kernel-agent#11` closed with reclassification, campaign repo scaffolded |
| 7 | **N/A** — nothing to verify beyond "the ledger exists and the issues are filed", both of which are visible in git + gitea |
| 8 | this file |
## Memory entry from meta-iter1
No new memory entry needed. The lessons are:
- "Phase 0 prior-art survey can invalidate the campaign's initial scoping" — already a corollary of `feedback_dev_process` ("if baseline reveals the Phase 1 metric was tracking the wrong thing → loopback Phase 1"); the meta-campaign IS that loopback, applied at the scoping level.
- "iter1 = characterize-and-baseline" from `feedback_characterize_before_change` extends naturally: for a meta-campaign, the equivalent is "meta-iter1 = scope + ledger, real engineering starts iter2."
If iter2 produces a substantive process lesson worth memorializing, that goes in iter2's Phase 8.
## Next step
**Start iter2 (HEVC backend)**: extend `libva-v4l2-request-fourier` to populate `V4L2_CID_STATELESS_HEVC_EXT_SPS_ST_RPS` and `_LT_RPS` for VDPU381 HEVC. Sub-iter Phase 0 entry begins in `phase0_findings_iter2.md`.