\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro} The performance of a large language model on an accelerator is decided less by peak FLOPS than by how well the kernel exploits the memory system and the interconnect. This is especially true of attention, which in the decode phase reads a large KV cache to do a small amount of arithmetic. Optimizing such kernels is fundamentally a \emph{codesign} problem: the algorithm (how to tile, fuse, and reduce) and the hardware (what issue mechanism, what collective engine, what memory hierarchy) have to be designed against each other. Optimizing only the software leaves the hardware idle; adding hardware that the software cannot reach is wasted area. \paragraph{The 1H focus: attention.} This half's work targets attention. Multi-head attention (MHA) was studied previously and is taken here as the established baseline. The new work is FlashAttention-style tiling and Grouped-Query Attention (GQA)---the form used by modern long-context decoders, in which several query heads share a single KV head to shrink the KV cache. Realizing a fast \emph{fused} GQA kernel, however, is not a single optimization. It decomposes into two enabling optimizations that we studied separately and then brought together inside the fused kernel: \begin{enumerate} \item \textbf{GEMM optimization} via a composite command (\S\ref{sec:gemm}): a way to issue a tiled matrix multiply as one self-routing pipeline so the MAC array stays fed without per-tile command overhead. Attention's $Q\!\cdot\!K^{\top}$ and $P\!\cdot\!V$ products are exactly such GEMMs. \item \textbf{Communication optimization} via PE\_IPCQ (\S\ref{sec:allreduce}): a per-PE on-device collective engine that performs all-reduce overlapped with compute. Attention's multi-user and sequence-parallel KV reductions are exactly such collectives. \end{enumerate} The report therefore reads as \emph{two enablers building to one capstone}: GEMM (\S\ref{sec:gemm}) and all-reduce (\S\ref{sec:allreduce}) are developed and measured on their own, and then fused GQA (\S\ref{sec:gqa}) shows them operating together. Before the results, \S\ref{sec:platform} describes the KernBench platform---why a software-stack-independent, source-level simulator is the right tool for this question, how it executes a kernel, how it computes latency and how accurate that is, and the exact hardware configuration used throughout. We close with a cross-cutting discussion of which hardware changes are worth their cost (\S\ref{sec:discussion}), a conclusion (\S\ref{sec:conclusion}), and the 2H agenda (\S\ref{sec:future}): extending from attention to the feed-forward and mixture-of-experts layers, and to the compute/data distribution questions that full LLM decoding and agentic workloads raise.