Workshop Feedback Summary
Workshop on Mixing Logic and DRAM:
Chips that Compute and Remember
Sunday, June 1st, 1997, 8:30am-5:30pm
The following feedback was collated by Liz Pennell.
Please send corrections or comments
|Content of Workshop
|Accuracy of CFP
|Level of Presentations
|Content of Handouts
|Use of Visuals
Organize another workshop?
Thirty-one people responded, and they all said yes (to some extent). Several
people added comments such as:
- Yes, but more focused would be better.
- Yes, but only if some more work occurs and the scope of the workshop
- Yes, but only if there is new research.
- Perhaps, if there are enough ideas to fill another workshop.
- Maybe two years from now.
Comments from attendees:
Several comments were common in several of the feedback sheets:
We now present several of the more detailed comments with only
minor editing. The comments are in no particular order.
- Several people expressed satisfaction with the "open mike" session.
Here's a sampling of the comments: "I think the last session (free mike)
is excellent." "Open mike session was good." "Open mike very good."
- It seems that the inclusion of some papers in the roundtables
without a formal presentation didn't work too well: "Not good that
some papers were not presented. Either reject or make them present."
"Some papers were not presented but were part of round tables anyway.
That didn't really work--they didn't come into the discussion very
much." Perhaps we should include these papers as posters in a separate
session next time.
- There was some feeling that the lack of a formal set of proceedings
would hurt the future impact of this workshop. Here are two specific
- "Publish the papers in some kind of proceedings for the
workshop: without a proceedings that includes all papers, I'm afraid
the authors will not be recognized."
- "Without a proceedings, the workshop will be forgotten in history.
The Web is a great way to prepublish papers, but for now, the above is
- Several people complained about the cost of the workshop. "Should
be cheaper." "Registration fee was very high." "Too expensive."
Finally, one attendee provided us with a plan for the next workshop. We
encourage this person to come forward and organize the next one!
- "This workshop satisfied two issues. 1. An analysis of the technology
(1st paper) and 2. Opened the discussion to new, interesting architectures.
I would like to have seen, in addition, an overview of the issues,
technology, etc. to set the stage for the later presentations."
- "Patterson and Smith did a nice job of running the workshop, as
expected. I was a bit disappointed in some of the presentations--especially
the SIMD/DIM stuff. I would have liked to see us get down to real issues:
cost tradeoffs, process differences, architectural implications, and have
some more tutorial-ish stuff followed by debates. But it was fun."
- "Very good workshop overall. Not that controversial. Last session
was very good though."
- "Overall the workshop was good. However, some papers didn't clearly
belong to this workshop."
- "Good workshop. Bravo!"
- "Learned a lot, good use of time. Liked the long breaks, speaker
panels at end of sessions, open mike."
- "The room was small, we could have a room in which we have elevated
back seats (so as you can guess, I was sitting in back!)"
- "Logic and DRAM integration is an emerging research area, with
researchers coming from many perspectives (EE background, computer
architecture, software). It is very important to encourage
cross-pollination between these groups, and between industry and
academia. I recommend strongly that the workshop should be offered
- "If a paper arouses a lot of questions/discussions we should
allow more time for this. Presentation time could be reduced."
- "I loved the format of 3 talks, panel discussion, and breaks."
- "A more focused topic might be better in the future."
- "Surprisingly little novel content...maybe IRAM is a packaging
'integration' concept more than it is an architectural concept."
- "Segment talks into technology, uprocs, mp's, appl. specific. We
need to understand tech & manufacturing issues better to design a
- "It would have been useful to divide it into general-purpose processing
(how DRAM affects memory hierarchies) and special purpose processing (how
DRAM and logic combined can speed up specific, special tasks). Both have
considerably different fields of interest."
"Future workshop topics: limit scope to focus work, to limit attendance,
to focus the expertise of the attendees.
In another year, enough new work will occur in the area of IRAM that it will
support true workshops in all of these topics."
- Microprocessor w/ integrated DRAM: how should commodity processors
- Single chip systems with integrated DRAM: organization of single
memory chip systems.
- High-performance DRAM: macro organization optimizing for something
other than identity (likely this is a circuit-technology workshop that
does not compliment ISCA very well).
- SIMD/Vector processing w/ integrated DRAM: keep the SIMD people away
from the rest of the world. (Has anything worthwhile occurred when SIMD
people were in a workshop with general purpose microprocessor people?)
workshop web page