The note still described DFlash2, one slot at 262144 and a 1:1 split -- all of
which the day's work replaced. It now carries:
- the DSpark swap with the table that matters (1.27 vs 1.92 GiB, block_size 7 vs
8 so n_max 6 vs 7, a Markov head instead of the candidate selector, and NO
sliding window) and the rule behind the sizing: the draft context is built
with n_ctx = llama_n_ctx(ctx_tgt), so a drafter without a window caches the
whole target context -- 5.0 GiB here, against DFlash2's ~40 MiB.
- the failure that rule produces when ignored: load succeeds, /health answers,
and the first draft decode dies with an OOM at 1:1.
- why the split moved a second time: tripling the batch costs ROCm1 about twice
what it costs ROCm0, with the 38,27 -> 41,24 -> 40,25 measurement table.
- the deployed flags, the 2-slot shape (n_slots = 2, n_ctx_slot = 131072), the
DSpark init lines, and balanced 29.98 / 29.98 GiB cards.
- honest scoping on the older measurements: the throughput, drafter-worth and
ngram tables were taken on DFlash2, and the agent-loop numbers on one slot.
- the 39:26 page-fault signature as a thing to watch, marked as NOT an OOM.
Frank
718a283afc