Hybrid Dataflow Selection: Inputs and Outputs

Inputs and outputs contract

Inputs and Outputs for Hybrid Dataflow Selection is anchored on End-to-end joules per inference and latency improvement from per-layer dataflow switching versus single-style baseline.. Convert measurements into mechanism-backed decisions with clear owner accountability.

INPUTS
  - workload profile and SLA target
  - model precision and quality thresholds
  - compiler/runtime/firmware metadata
  - hardware operating envelope assumptions

OUTPUTS
  - evidence-backed bottleneck classification
  - owner-signed mitigation proposal
  - validation matrix with rollback triggers
  - release recommendation

Ownership split

OWNERSHIP LAYERS - Hybrid Dataflow Selection

+----------------------+--------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Team                 | Primary responsibility         | Closure artifact               |
+----------------------+--------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| system architect | mechanism and architecture intent| design rationale + tradeoffs   |
| compiler/runtime owner | mapping, runtime, and execution   | profile traces + bottleneck map|
| performance modeling owner | correctness, risk, and signoff    | test report + closure memo     |
+----------------------+--------------------------------+--------------------------------+

AI accelerator deep dive

Dataflow choices are durable architecture decisions that shape memory and scheduling cost.

Concept diagram

DATAFLOW DECISION

input/output/weight stationary
  -> locality pattern
  -> movement cost
  -> throughput and power

Metric graph

DATAFLOW COST MIX

activation traffic   ███████
weight traffic       █████
partial-sum traffic  ██████

Metrics and artifacts to collect

• reuse factor map

• buffer pressure profile

• NoC traffic mix

• shape sensitivity analysis

Mini case study

A dataflow that won for convolution lost on attention-heavy batches due to activation movement pressure.

Debug branches

• Segment by model family

• Compare reuse vs movement

• Re-check mapping assumptions under batch variance

Senior review question

Ask: which first-principles bottleneck class explains the symptom, and what artifact proves it reproducibly?

Key takeaways

• Tie every accelerator claim to a reproducible workload slice and one primary metric trend.

• Prefer bounded fixes with clear owner and rollback boundary over broad tuning bundles.

Common pitfalls

• Optimizing synthetic kernels without production-shape validation.

• Reading average latency while ignoring p95 and p99 behavior.

• Declaring sparse or precision wins without fallback and quality evidence.

Handoff explanation

Inputs should include workload profile, model revision, compiler/runtime versions, and platform power mode.

Outputs must include actionable interpretation of End-to-end joules per inference and latency improvement from per-layer dataflow switching versus single-style baseline., required artifacts (Dataflow policy playbook with layer-wise recommendations, transition rules, and expected gains.), owner, and validation scope.

The ideal handoff packet is reproducible: fixed seeds, explicit baseline, and rejected alternatives.