micheleandClaude Sonnet 5
6cff2c8a7c
neural_multiprocessor.v wraps dataflow_core.v (M7, unmodified) around the real, unmodified V1 PSRAM backend chain (int8_memory_access -> memory_interface -> psram_controller), funneling N_SLOTS independent Memory Backend Interface ports through a new generic N-port arbiter (slot_mem_arbiter.v) inspired by (not copied from) V1's own mem_arbiter.v. Real concurrent-slot simulation immediately surfaced a genuine bug (ERR-0008): memory_manager/prefetch_engine's byte-level backend protocol is fire-and-forget (a single-cycle mem_req pulse with no accept handshake) - correct for M4's direct 1:1 connection, but a naive arbiter silently drops a pulse arriving while the shared bus is owned by another slot, hanging that slot forever. Fixed with a per-port pending-request latch, the same "queue, don't drop" idiom already used by memory_manager's own pf_pending register (ERR-0006). Verified (Verilator): 4/4 PASS with 2 slots genuinely contending for one real PSRAM port (444 cycles). No regression on M4's own testbench. Real synthesis + nextpnr-ecp5 P&R (no harness needed - real PSRAM pins keep the top-level at 157 pins): 0 problems, Fmax 142.45 MHz, PASS at 80MHz. Arbitration policy is fixed lowest-index priority, not fairness- balanced (DEC-0010) - consistent with every other "simplest correct policy first" scheduling choice in this roadmap, revisited only if M9's real measurement shows starvation matters. Logged: simulation/synthesis/timing/benchmark/decisions (DEC-0010)/ experiments (EXP-0009)/errors (ERR-0008)/development.log, ROADMAP.md updated. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013xXuuRUWZScuo1DeYJxs3v