diff --git a/docs/k7_h264idct8_phase1.md b/docs/k7_h264idct8_phase1.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c687474
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/k7_h264idct8_phase1.md
@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
+---
+cycle: 7
+phase: 1
+status: open
+date_opened: 2026-05-18
+codec: H.264
+kernel: IDCT 8x8 + add (High-profile residual)
+parent: project_h264_scope_added.md (memory)
+predicted_R: 0.4-0.8 (YELLOW/ORANGE) — comparable to VP9 IDCT 8x8 (cycle 1, R=0.92)
+---
+
+# Cycle 7, Phase 1 — H.264 IDCT 8×8 + add
+
+Second H.264 kernel. 8×8 inverse integer transform used in
+High-profile H.264 (most modern H.264 encodes High; broadcast
+TV, web streams, file media). Smaller scope than IDCT 4×4 but
+much more compute-heavy per block.
+
+## Why IDCT 8x8 next
+
+- Closely analogous to **cycle 1 (VP9 IDCT 8×8) which was R=0.92
+  GREEN**. Best candidate for a near-immediate H.264 GREEN result.
+- 64 coefficients per block (8×8) = same data shape as cycle 1.
+- Integer butterfly (no trig multiplies) but more sub-stages than
+  4×4. Per-block compute weight ~3-5× the 4×4.
+- H.264 High-profile uses IDCT 8×8 for ~40-60 % of residual blocks
+  (encoder choice). Decoder must support it for spec compliance.
+
+## Kernel contract
+
+Per H.264 spec §8.5.13 (8x8 inverse integer transform). 1D
+butterfly (g[0..7] from input d[0..7]):
+
+```
+e[0] = d[0] + d[4]
+e[1] = -d[3] + d[5] - d[7] - (d[7] >> 1)
+e[2] = d[0] - d[4]
+e[3] = d[1] + d[7] - d[3] - (d[3] >> 1)
+e[4] = (d[2] >> 1) - d[6]
+e[5] = -d[1] + d[7] + d[5] + (d[5] >> 1)
+e[6] = d[2] + (d[6] >> 1)
+e[7] = d[3] + d[5] + d[1] + (d[1] >> 1)
+
+f[0] = e[0] + e[6]
+f[1] = e[1] + (e[7] >> 2)
+f[2] = e[2] + e[4]
+f[3] = e[3] + (e[5] >> 2)
+f[4] = e[2] - e[4]
+f[5] = (e[3] >> 2) - e[5]
+f[6] = e[0] - e[6]
+f[7] = e[7] - (e[1] >> 2)
+
+g[0..7] = butterfly of f[0..7]
+```
+
+Applied row-pass then column-pass (per H.264/FFmpeg convention,
+with column-major block).
+
+Final: dst[r,c] = clip(dst[r,c] + (g_2d[r,c] + 32) >> 6).
+
+## NEON reference (M3 target)
+
+FFmpeg's `ff_h264_idct8_add_neon`
+(external/ffmpeg-snapshot/libavcodec/aarch64/h264idct_neon.S
+line 267, ~60 instructions / pass × 2 + transpose + dst-add).
+Signature mirrors cycle 6 IDCT 4×4:
+
+```
+void ff_h264_idct8_add_neon(uint8_t *dst, int16_t *block, ptrdiff_t stride);
+```
+
+Block: 64 int16, column-major (per cycle 6 Phase 9 lesson).
+
+## 30fps@1080p H.264 8×8 floor
+
+1920×1080 luma using all 8×8 transforms: 240 × 135 = 32 400
+blocks/frame × 30 fps = 0.972 Mblock/s. Same as VP9 IDCT 8×8
+(cycle 1) since the block density is the same.
+
+**30fps@1080p floor: 0.972 Mblock/s.**
+
+## Predicted R₇
+
+Per the cycle 1 / cycle 6 patterns:
+- VP9 IDCT 8×8 NEON M3 = 8.171 Mblock/s (cycle 1), per-block 122 ns
+- H.264 IDCT 8×8 likely **less compute per block** than VP9 (no
+  trig multiplies, just integer ops + shifts) → maybe 80-120 ns
+  per block → 8-12 Mblock/s NEON
+- QPU 8×8 IDCT R=0.92 GREEN in cycle 1 came from the matching
+  16-lane / 8-row layout and shared-mem transpose
+- H.264 IDCT 8×8 same shape → predicted **R₇ ≈ 0.5-0.9 YELLOW/GREEN**
+
+## Acceptance for Phase 7
+
+- M1: 100.0000% bit-exact (10000+ random blocks)
+- M3: captured
+- M2: captured
+- R₇: classified
+- M4: same-kernel mixed bench measured
+
+## Cycle 7 deliverables
+
+1. `tests/h264_idct8_ref.c` — column-major C reference
+2. `tests/bench_neon_h264idct8.c` — Phase 3 bench
+3. `src/v3d_h264idct8.comp` — Phase 6 shader (likely close to
+   v3d_idct8.comp shape, but with different butterfly + integer
+   math instead of Q14 trig)
+4. `tests/bench_v3d_h264idct8.c` — Phase 6+7 bench
+5. M4 via `bench_concurrent_mixed.c` extension
+
+## Phase 4 effort estimate
+
+Higher than cycle 1's iterations because the 8×8 IT butterfly is
+more involved (3 sub-stages vs cycle 1's IDCT8 single butterfly).
+~3-4 hours through Phase 7. Phase 5 Sonnet review again
+non-skippable per CLAUDE.md.
+
+## Next step (within this phase)
+
+Move to Phase 3 (NEON baseline M3) after writing the C reference.
+
+## Future H.264 cycles (preview, post cycle 7)
+
+- Cycle 8 — H.264 chroma MC (4-tap; very lightweight; predicted
+  RED per cycle 6 pattern but smaller still)
+- Cycle 9 — H.264 luma quarter-pel MC (6-tap; analogous to cycle 3
+  VP9 MC which was RED; predicted RED)
+- Cycle 10 — H.264 in-loop deblock (analogous to cycle 2/4 VP9
+  LPF which were GREEN; predicted GREEN)
+- After cycle 10: scope re-evaluated based on cycle 7/10 results