e8b7f4f064aebfd45bc3146e02e2cfaa3e72b3b9
Two new evaluation plots for §3 GEMM, both using the composite window
as the denominator (the up-front tl.load of A in load_ref is therefore
excluded — only HBM traffic and compute inside the composite count):
- gemm_hbm_bw_util.png: per-PE HBM bandwidth utilization against the
256 GB/s per-PE ceiling. Answers "is this workload memory-bound on
this configuration?" — small/single-tile shapes sit at 22–46%
(pipeline-fill-limited), large or output-write-dominated shapes
saturate (≥85%).
- gemm_per_pe_tflops.png: per-PE GEMM throughput against the 8 TFLOP/s
engine peak. The deep-K K=3072 load_ref case lands at
7.18 TFLOP/s (~90% of peak) — the configuration's clean win.
ref_ref at the same shape drops to 3.83 TFLOP/s because the second
operand doubles HBM pressure and the kernel hits the BW ceiling.
The variant gap on this chart is the operational cost of NOT
pre-staging the activation.
Both charts compare two operand-staging variants on every shape:
load_ref ("activation pre-staged", weight-only HBM streaming) and
ref_ref (both A and W streamed from HBM). load_load is omitted —
with both operands pre-staged the composite carries no HBM traffic
and the BW metric collapses to 0.
Analytic / measured peak unified to the single hardware spec
(8.0 TFLOP/s = 8000 flops/ns). T_STAGE is now derived as
tile_flops / peak (= 16.384 ns for the 32×64×32 tile) rather than
the previous hardcoded 16 ns, so MAC efficiency and per-PE TFLOPS%
share the same denominator and never disagree. Side effect: max
analytic-vs-measured gap tightens from 2.2 ppt to 1.4 ppt across
the sweep.
§3 Results restructured: lead with the two new evaluation plots
(BW saturation, achieved throughput), then the MAC-utilization
analytic-vs-measured chart serves as the validation step, then the
per-stage engine wall-clock as the supporting diagnostic. §3
Analysis updated to use the load_ref / ref_ref contrast as the
hardware-software boundary line that motivates the GQA kernel of §5.
§2.4 Accuracy claim updated to match: GEMM analytic-vs-measured
agreement is now "within 1.4 ppt across every swept shape", from
~7.7% at single-tile up to ~90% at K=3072. Subtitle/title vertical
stacking glitch in the matplotlib charts fixed in passing.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
kernbench
A discrete-event simulator for AI accelerator hardware, built on SimPy. It models the full data path — from host PCIe injection through IO chiplet, NOC mesh, crossbar, and HBM — to measure end-to-end latency with contention and queueing.
Architecture
Host (CLI)
|
+-- kernbench run -> run a benchmark (QKV GEMM, AllReduce, ...)
+-- kernbench probe -> latency/BW analysis for predefined traffic patterns
|
v
+---------------------------------------------------+
| Runtime API (runtime_api/) |
| MemoryWriteMsg, MemoryReadMsg, PeDmaMsg, |
| KernelLaunchMsg |
+---------------------------------------------------+
| Simulation Engine (sim_engine/) |
| SimPy processes, wire model, BW occupancy |
+---------------------------------------------------+
| Components (components/) |
| pcie_ep, io_cpu, m_cpu, noc, xbar, hbm_ctrl, |
| pe_cpu, pe_dma, pe_gemm, pe_math, pe_tcm, ... |
+---------------------------------------------------+
| Topology (topology/) |
| YAML-driven graph: 4x4 cube mesh, UCIe links, |
| IO chiplet with NOC, HBM slices |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Prerequisites
- Python 3.10+
- Dependencies:
simpy,pyyaml,pytest
Installation
# Create virtual environment
python -m venv .venv
# Activate (Windows)
.venv\Scripts\activate
# Activate (Linux/macOS)
source .venv/bin/activate
# Install in editable mode
pip install -e ".[dev]"
Usage
Probe — Latency and Bandwidth Analysis
The probe command runs predefined traffic patterns (H2D write, D2H read,
PE DMA) and reports latency breakdown, bottleneck bandwidth, and utilization.
# Run all probe cases
kernbench probe --topology topology.yaml
# Run a specific case
kernbench probe --topology topology.yaml --case pe-local-hbm
Output includes:
- Summary tables — actual latency, overhead/drain/wire breakdown, effective BW, utilization
- BW saturation sweep — utilization at 4KB through 1MB to show saturation threshold
- Per-hop route traces — cumulative timestamps at every node along the path
Run — Execute a Benchmark
# Run a benchmark on all devices
kernbench run --topology topology.yaml --bench qkv_gemm
# Run on a specific device
kernbench run --topology topology.yaml --bench qkv_gemm --device sip:0
Available benchmarks (in benches/):
qkv_gemm— single-PE QKV GEMMqkv_gemm_multi_pe— multi-PE QKV GEMMipcq_allreduce— IPCQ AllReduce
Tests
# Run all tests (278 tests)
pytest
# Run a specific test file
pytest tests/test_probe.py -v
# Run a single test
pytest tests/test_probe.py::test_h2d_latency_monotonic -v
# Run with output shown
pytest -s tests/test_probe.py
Key test files:
| File | Coverage |
|---|---|
test_probe.py |
Probe latency invariants, monotonicity, determinism, BW sweep |
test_engine.py |
SimPy engine: submit/wait/complete, routing, multi-SIP |
test_bw_occupancy.py |
Wire BW contention, HOL blocking, back-to-back serialization |
test_iochiplet_noc_d2h.py |
IO chiplet NOC topology, H2D/D2H data paths |
test_noc_mesh.py |
2D mesh NOC routing, Manhattan distance |
test_pe_components.py |
PE-internal components: cpu, scheduler, dma, gemm |
test_routing.py |
XY routing, address resolution, path finding |
test_topology_compile.py |
YAML topology compilation, node/edge validation |
Topology Configuration
The system is configured via topology.yaml. Key parameters:
| Parameter | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|
ns_per_mm |
0.01 | Wire propagation delay (10 ps/mm) |
cube_mesh |
4x4 | Cube grid dimensions per SIP |
ucie.overhead_ns |
8.0 | UCIe protocol overhead per port (16ns per crossing) |
hbm_ctrl.efficiency |
0.8 | HBM effective BW factor (256 to 204.8 GB/s) |
xbar.overhead_ns |
2.0 | Crossbar arbitration delay |
xbar_to_hbm_bw_gbs |
256.0 | Raw HBM bandwidth per slice |
Project Structure
kernbench/
+-- src/kernbench/
| +-- cli/ # CLI entry points (main, probe, report)
| +-- common/ # Shared types (Completion, RequestHandle, Trace)
| +-- components/ # Hardware component models (SimPy processes)
| +-- di/ # Dependency injection
| +-- policy/ # Routing (XY), address decoding (PhysAddr)
| +-- runtime_api/ # Host-facing API (messages, bench runner)
| +-- sim_engine/ # Discrete-event engine, transaction, wire model
| +-- topology/ # YAML builder, mesh generator, graph types
| +-- triton_emu/ # Triton kernel emulation
+-- benches/ # Benchmark implementations
+-- tests/ # pytest test suite (278 tests)
+-- docs/ # ADRs, latency model docs, diagrams
+-- topology.yaml # System topology configuration
+-- CHANGES.md # Changelog
Documentation
- CHANGES.md — changelog with detailed descriptions of each release
- docs/onboarding/latency-model.md — latency model explanation with worked examples
- docs/onboarding/ — onboarding guides (architecture overview, latency model, CCL author guide, intro presentation)
- docs/adr/ — Architecture Decision Records
Description
Languages
Python
97.6%
HTML
2.4%