User-flagged 2026-05-18: the cycles 3 (MC) + 5 (CDEF) 'CPU only'
verdicts were based on M4 measuring same-kernel concurrent NEON+QPU,
which is the WORST case for memory-bandwidth contention. A real
decoder pipeline has CPU doing kernel A + QPU doing kernel B
concurrently — different access patterns contend less.
Concretely: in a real pipeline, CPU runs entropy + MC + other work
while QPU is idle except for IDCT + LPF. The 'opportunistic QPU
helper' for CDEF (or MC) hasn't been measured. M4 set the bar too
high.
Updates:
- docs/k3_mc_phase7.md §'M4 methodology caveat' added with the
user's contribution framing
- docs/k5_cdef_phase3_partial.md §'Deployment recommendation'
softened from 'CPU only' to 'CPU baseline; QPU helper viable in
mixed-kernel deployment, unmeasured'
- docs/issues/003-mixed-kernel-m4-bench.md filed — the rigorous
test to close the question (4 variants: bandwidth+bandwidth,
compute+CDEF, same-kernel control, real-pipeline mix)
- ~/.claude/projects/-home-mfritsche-src-daedalus-fourier/memory/
feedback_m4_same_kernel_worst_case.md added — carries the
calibration into future cycles + Phase 8 deployment decisions
- MEMORY.md index updated
The bandwidth-bound vs compute-bound classification still holds at
the kernel level — Phase 9 cross-cycle lesson stays valid. But its
mapping to deployment is nuanced:
- Bandwidth-bound on QPU → DEFINITIVE offload (M4 +ve, cycles 1+2+4)
- Compute-bound on QPU → OPPORTUNISTIC helper if pipeline has
bandwidth-light CPU work running concurrently (cycles 3+5,
needs Issue 003 measurement)
Phase 8 V4L2 wrapper should keep CDEF + MC slot-able to either CPU
or QPU at runtime (not hard-baked), so Issue 003's result can update
the dispatch table without re-architecture.
No code changes. Doc + memory + issue only.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
marfrit
460a6a6d08