
         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

         
{"id":"gen-1787682602-x8wvGtrq4WmtQCpSgN6O","object":"chat.completion","created":1787682602,"model":"minimax/minimax-m3:free","provider":"GMICloud","system_fingerprint":null,"service_tier":null,"choices":[{"index":0,"logprobs":null,"finish_reason":"stop","native_finish_reason":"stop","message":{"role":"assistant","content":"# MUL/DIV Unit\n\n## Status\n\nStub — initial scoping document. No XH-1 implementation decisions are yet committed.\n\n## Abstract\n\nThis document investigates the design of the integer multiply/divide (MUL/DIV) execution unit for the XH-1 core. The unit must implement the RV64M extension (MUL, MULH, MULHU, MULHSU, DIV, DIVU, REM, REMU) and, depending on project scope, the RV64B bit-manipulation extensions (e.g., CLZ, CTZ, BSET, BEXT) which reuse portions of the MUL datapath. The design must be evaluated against the XH-1's 128-core replication factor: a unit that is only 2% of core area in a single core consumes the equivalent area of ~2.5 cores across the die when replicated 128 times. The unit's latency directly impacts critical-path timing, and its throughput affects overall core IPC under integer-heavy workloads (cryptography, hashing, address arithmetic, HPC kernels).\n\n## Research Question\n\nWhat is the optimal MUL/DIV unit organization for a XH-1 core given that the design will be replicated 128 times, considering latency, throughput, area, power, and verification complexity trade-offs across in-order, out-of-order, and hybrid pipeline styles?\n\n## Background\n\n### RISC-V M Extension Semantics (RV64M)\n\nFACT: The RISC-V M extension (RV64M for 64-bit) defines eight instructions:\n- MUL, MULH, MULHU, MULHSU: 64×64→128 bit multiply (lower 64 or upper 64 of result)\n- DIV, DIVU: 64÷64 signed/unsigned quotient\n- REM, REMU: 64÷64 signed/unsigned remainder\n- DIV/DIVU/REM/REMU have defined corner cases: division by zero returns -1 (signed) or -1 (unsigned quotient), remainder by zero returns the dividend; signed overflow (most-negative ÷ -1) returns the quotient as the most-negative value and remainder 0.\n\nThe full 64×64→128-bit multiply requires a true 128-bit result datapath even when only the upper or lower 64 bits are returned.\n\n### Latency Reference Points (FACT, from published RISC-V implementations, see Sources)\n\n- Rocket Chip (SiFive, in-order, BOOM-style 5-stage scaled): MUL is 3-cycle latency (unpipelined, iterative), DIV is variable 8–35 cycles.\n- BOOM v2/v3 (out-of-order, 6–7 wide): MUL 1-cycle (pipelined), DIV variable 2–34 cycles.\n- XiangShan (Nanjing, out-of-order): MUL 2-cycle pipelined, DIV variable.\n- Ibex (lowRISC, in-order): MUL single-cycle combinational or 1-cycle pipelined; iterative DIV.\n- Cortex-A77 (Arm, reference comparison): MUL 3-cycle, DIV 4–12 cycle variable.\n\n### Divide Algorithms\n\nFACT: Three primary classes exist:\n1. **Digit-recurrence / shift-subtract (radix-2, radix-4, SRT)**: 64 cycles worst-case for radix-2; radix-4 reduces to ~33 cycles; iterative, small area.\n2. **Newton-Raphson reciprocal multiplication**: 4–6 cycle reciprocal, 1 MUL → 12–14 cycles total; high throughput on subsequent divides; needs ~17-bit seed table; occupies more area (multiplier + lookup ROM).\n3. **Goldschmidt**: similar to Newton, slightly different convergence.\n\nThe RISC-V M extension does not require IEEE-754 compliant division; integer rounding is sufficient, simplifying hardware.\n\n## Existing Approaches\n\n### A1. Iterative Shift-Subtract Divider (Radix-2)\n\n- **Datapath**: 128-bit (64 remainder + 64 divisor) shifter/subtractor, 64-cycle worst case.\n- **Latency**: 64 cycles (or 32 with radix-4 merging).\n- **Throughput**: 1 divide per 64 cycles (not pipelined) or 1/cycle if pipelined with 64 stages.\n- **Area**: Smallest — typically 1–2 kGE plus control.\n- **Power**: Lowest; minimal toggle rate per non-dividing cycle.\n- **Used in**: Rocket (radix-4 unpipelined), Ibex (radix-4).\n\n### A2. Pipelined Iterative Divider\n\n- **Datapath**: same as A1 but with pipeline registers at each iteration; latency fixed at 64 cycles, throughput 1/cycle.\n- **Latency**: 64 cycles, fixed.\n- **Throughput**: 1/cycle.\n- **Area**: ~3–5× A1 due to per-stage registers; significant.\n- **Power**: Higher clock-gating complexity; only worthwhile under sustained divide streams.\n\n### A3. Newton-Raphson Divider\n\n- **Datapath**: shared MUL unit, 17-bit reciprocal seed ROM, 2–3 MUL units working in parallel.\n- **Latency**: 4–6 cycles for reciprocal + 1 MUL correction = 6–8 cycles typical.\n- **Throughput**: 1 divide per ~6–8 cycles.\n- **Area**: 1 reciprocal ROM (~4–8 kbits) + 2–3 MULs; large.\n- **Power**: Higher static and dynamic (multiplier always active during divide).\n- **Used in**: High-performance x86 cores (Intel since Haswell uses Radix-16 + Newton), some Arm cores.\n\n### A4. Approximate / Lookup-Based Dividers (small operand ranges)\n\n- Rarely used for 64-bit; not relevant to XH-1 unless a specific workload (e.g., 32-bit address arithmetic) dominates.\n\n## Alternative Designs\n\n### B1. Hybrid MUL + Sequential-Iterative DIV (Rocket-style)\n\n- MUL: 64×64→128 pipelined in 1–2 stages.\n- DIV: radix-4 or radix-2 iterative, 33–64 cycles, blocking on the unit.\n- Latency hide: out-of-order core can issue subsequent independent ops; in-order core must stall.\n- Single divider per core, 1–3 MUL pipelined stages.\n\n### B2. Combined MUL/MAC (Multiply-Accumulate) Unit\n\n- 64×64→128 with an additional accumulator register; supports future RV MAC extensions (proposed in some bitmanip drafts).\n- Adds ~10–15% area over pure MUL.\n- Useful for DSP, ML, and HPC; 128-core replication benefits workloads with matrix-style kernels.\n\n### B3. Configurable MUL Width (32-bit fast path)\n\n- Detect when both operands are zero-extended from 32 bits; use a 32×32→64 fast multiplier (~¼ area, ~½ latency).\n- Common in commercial cores (Arm, x86).\n- Branch-predictor / decoder pre-classifies 32-bit-mul hint (e.g., MULW — but note RV64M only defines full 64×64 MUL; 32-bit W variants are in RV64I/RV32I base).\n- Open question: whether a \"fast-path 32-bit MUL\" justifies the verification cost.\n\n### B4. Bypassable Output with Operand Width Detection\n\n- Always implement full 64×64→128; the decoder examines the instruction to forward only the required 64 bits.\n- Verification: a single source of truth (full 128-bit datapath), reducing dual-mode bugs.\n- Disadvantage: no area saving.\n\n## Comparison\n\n| Design | MUL Latency | MUL Tput | DIV Latency | DIV Tput | Rel. Area (MUL) | Rel. Area (MUL+DIV) | Power (active) | Verification Complexity |\n|--------|------------|----------|-------------|----------|------------------|----------------------|----------------|--------------------------|\n| A1 (radix-2 iter. DIV) | 1-cycle comb. or 1-cycle pipe | 1/cycle | 64 cycles | 1/64 cycles | 1.0× | 1.4× | Lowest | Low |\n| A2 (pipelined iter. DIV) | 1-cycle | 1/cycle | 64 cycles | 1/cycle | 1.0× | 2.5× | Med | Med |\n| A3 (Newton-Raphson) | 1-cycle | 1/cycle | 6–8 cycles | 1/6–8 | 3.0× (3 MULs) | 4.0× | High | High |\n| B1 (Rocket-style) | 1–2 cycle | 1/cycle | 33–64 cycle | 1/33–64 | 1.2× | 1.8× | Low–Med | Low–Med |\n| B2 (+ MAC) | 1–2 cycle | 1/cycle | 33–64 cycle | 1/33–64 | 1.4× | 2.0× | Med | Med |\n| B3 (32-bit fast) | 0.5–1 cycle | 1/cycle | (not changed) | (not changed) | 0.9× | 1.3× | Low | Med–High (dual mode) |\n| B4 (full only) | 1–2 cycle | 1/cycle | 33–64 cycle | 1/33–64 | 1.2× | 1.8× | Med | Lowest |\n\nASSUMPTION: Relative area figures are estimates based on the relative complexity of the published designs in the Sources section. Actual XH-1 synthesis numbers are INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE pending RTL implementation.\n\n## Advantages\n\n### A1 / B1\n- Smallest area; lowest per-core replication cost.\n- Lowest static and dynamic power in the typical case (most cycles no MUL/DIV active).\n- Simpler verification; one mode of operation.\n- Well-understood reference implementation (Rocket, Ibex) for cross-checking.\n\n### A3 (Newton-Raphson)\n- Low latency for sequential divides — important for cryptography (RSA, ECC modular reduction) and HPC.\n- Amortizes multiplier cost if MAC (B2) is also desired.\n\n### B2 (MAC)\n- Enables future-proofing for proposed bitmanip and MAC extensions.\n- Helpful for matrix multiplication kernels running across 128 cores.\n\n## Disadvantages\n\n### A1 / B1\n- Variable DIV latency complicates scheduling in an in-order core; in-order cores stall 33–64 cycles per divide.\n- Worst-case latency hits interrupt latency, branch-target computation if the MUL/DIV is on a branch path.\n- Not a fit for sustained divide-bound workloads (e.g., modulo arithmetic in bignum).\n\n### A3\n- Area at 128-core replication is severe; ~4× a single MUL unit.\n- Power: a 64×64 multiplier running 1/cycle is one of the highest-power blocks in a typical core.\n- Verification: Newton iteration precision (must converge to within 1 ULP across all operands) is notoriously subtle.\n\n### B3\n- Verification: dual datapath (32-bit and 64-bit) must be exhaustively cross-checked.\n- The classification logic (operand-width detection) is itself a source of corner-case bugs.\n\n### B2\n- Adds a third writeback port or accumulator path; competes with the FPU/LSU for writeback slots in a multi-issue core.\n\n## XH-1 Considerations\n\nPROPOSAL: The XH-1 core should adopt **B1 (Hybrid MUL + Iterative DIV)** as the baseline, with the following parameters, pending RTL validation:\n- **MUL**: 64×64→128, 1-cycle pipelined (1 stage of pipeline registers), throughput 1/cycle. For 2-issue or wider cores, replicate to 2 MUL pipelines.\n- **DIV**: Radix-4 shift-subtract, 33–35 cycles worst case, blocking, non-pipelined.\n- **REM**: Reuse the DIV datapath; remainder is a by-product.\n- **Bypass paths**: From MUL output directly to subsequent dependent ALU/branch in the next cycle; otherwise the 1-cycle latency is already satisfied.\n- **Operand-width detection**: Defer B3 to a future revision; not justified at the 128-core replication level given the added verification cost.\n\nASSUMPTION: A 1-cycle MUL latency is achievable in the target process. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE on the XH-1 target process node and clock period.\n\nPROPOSAL: The MUL/DIV unit sits on the integer execution lane, sharing the issue queue with ALU and branch. It has its own reservation station (or issue-slot tag) so the issue logic can distinguish short-latency ALU (1 cycle) from long-latency MUL (1) and variable-latency DIV (33–35).\n\nPROPOSAL: For the in-order case, the MUL/DIV unit is non-blocking on MUL (1-cycle latency) but blocking on DIV; the in-order front-end stalls on a structural hazard only when a second DIV is issued before the first completes.\n\nPROPOSAL: For an out-of-order XH-1 core, the MUL/DIV unit exposes its variable DIV latency through the wakeup/select logic so that dependent instructions are replayed or re-issued with the correct ready signal.\n\n## 128-Core Scalability\n\nThe 128-core replication factor is the dominant cost driver for the MUL/DIV unit.\n\nPROPOSAL: At 128 cores, every MUL unit must be **power-gateable independently** so that cores not in use (DPM, dark-silicon) can be fully clock- and power-gated, including the MUL/DIV block.\n\nFACT: A typical MUL unit occupies 1–3% of a high-performance core's area; iterative DIV adds 0.5–1%. At 128 cores, this is ~128–256 kGE of pure MUL/DIV logic (ASSUMPTION, based on ~1 MGE/core total and 2% MUL/DIV share).\n\nOPEN QUESTION: Is the MUL/DIV area share dominated by the MUL datapath, the DIV datapath, the operand muxing, or the bypass network? Targeted synthesis required.\n\nASSUMPTION: The XH-1 die-area budget for the compute fabric is on the order of 60–80 mm² in a 7–5 nm process; the 128 cores plus interconnect fit within this. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE on the actual XH-1 die size and process node.\n\nPROPOSAL: The MUL/DIV unit should be **identical across all 128 cores** (no per-core specialization) to simplify verification and physical design. The replication should be a Verilog/SystemVerilog generate block driven by a single template.\n\nCONSIDERATION: If the XH-1 die includes a global clock-distribution network, the MUL/DIV critical path determines the local clock skew tolerance. A pipelined 1-cycle MUL has a short critical path (~one 64-bit adder) which is favorable; a non-pipelined 64-bit iterative divider has a 64-bit adder in its loop, which is the cycle-time limiter.\n\n## Performance Considerations\n\nPROPOSAL: **MUL throughput of 1/cycle is non-negotiable** for a modern XH-1 core. B1 satisfies this with a single 1-stage pipelined multiplier.\n\nPROPOSAL: **DIV throughput of 1/33 cycles (blocking) is acceptable** for most integer workloads. Workloads that require more (e.g., modular arithmetic in cryptography) will suffer; mitigation is left to software (see Software Considerations).\n\nFACT: From published SPECint 2017 / Embench profiles, MUL/DIV instructions are typically <2% of dynamic instruction count. DIV/REM is <0.5% of dynamic instructions. Hence MUL latency and throughput dominate, not DIV.\n\nASSUMPTION: XH-1 target workloads are similar in mix to Embench/SPECint-class. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE on the actual XH-1 target workload mix.\n\nOPEN QUESTION: Does XH-1 target HPC or ML workloads where MUL/DIV is a larger share of the instruction mix? If yes, the analysis shifts toward A3/B2.\n\n## Area Considerations\n\nPROPOSAL: Budget the MUL/DIV unit at **≤2% of single-core area** for the B1 design. At 128 cores this is ≤256% of one core's area — significant.\n\nOPEN QUESTION: Is the XH-1 core area budget (without MUL/DIV) known? The MUL/DIV area share can be re-expressed as a percentage of the entire 128-core die only when this is established.\n\nASSUMPTION: A1-style radix-2 DIV is the smallest practical divider; A3 (Newton) is 3–4× the area. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE on the XH-1-specific gate-count budget.\n\n## Power and Energy Considerations\n\nFACT: A 64×64→128 multiplier toggles a large number of bits per cycle when active; its dynamic power is proportional to operand activity factor. Power-gating the multiplier when idle is essential.\n\nPROPOSAL: The MUL/DIV unit should support **fine-grained clock gating** at the operand-mux boundary so that when no MUL/DIV is in flight, the entire unit is clock-gated to 0 toggle rate.\n\nPROPOSAL: The MUL pipeline register should be a clock-gated scan flop, not a latch, to simplify DFT.\n\nOPEN QUESTION: Does the XH-1 power budget allow all 128 MUL/DIV units to be active simultaneously? If not, per-core DPM must enforce that no more than N MUL/DIV units are in active divide at once. This is a system-level power-management question, not a unit-level one, but it constrains the unit's design (e.g., should the MUL unit support a \"low-power divide\" mode that takes 64 cycles at half frequency?).\n\nASSUMPTION: Energy per MUL is dominated by dynamic power; a single 64×64→128 MUL in a 7 nm process is on the order of single-digit pJ. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE on the XH-1 process.\n\n## Implementation Considerations\n\nPROPOSAL: Implement MUL as a **Wallace/Dadda tree of 4:2 compressors** feeding a final 128-bit carry-propagate adder. Tree depth 6–7; final CPA ~6 gates deep. The 1-cycle latency budget must accommodate the entire critical path from operand register → compressor tree → CPA → output register.\n\nPROPOSAL: Implement DIV as a **radix-4 shift-subtract** with restoring on negative remainder. 33 cycles for 64-bit. The remainder is the \"running remainder\" register after the 33rd cycle; the quotient is the shifted-out bits. REM is selected by muxing the appropriate output.\n\nPROPOSAL: The MUL unit is reused for the B-extension operations (CLZ, CTZ, BSET, BEXT, etc.) only if those share the same datapath structure; otherwise, add a separate small B-extension unit. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE on whether the XH-1 implements RV64B.\n\nPROPOSAL: Parameterize the MUL width with a Verilog `parameter WIDTH=64` so that the same RTL can be synthesized for 32-bit-only cores (test variant, debug, or soft-IP reuse) without manual rework.\n\n## Verification Considerations\n\nFACT: MUL and DIV are among the most heavily tested instructions in any RISC-V core; their verification is dominated by **corner-case operand pairs** (e.g., 0, 1, -1, 2, -2, 0x7FFF…, 0x8000…, 0xFFFF…, MSB=1 transitions).\n\nPROPOSAL: Adopt a **directed-random + constrained-random** verification flow using a golden reference model:\n- **Reference MUL**: SystemVerilog bigint (or DPI-C to a software bigint). Compare lower-64 and upper-64 separately.\n- **Reference DIV**: Software bigint that produces (quotient, remainder) per the RISC-V M-extension spec including corner cases.\n- **Coverage**: 100% of the corner cases (above), plus cross-product of small operand values (±1, ±2, ±2^32, ±2^63, ±2^64-1).\n\nPROPOSAL: Maintain a **regression list of 64 hand-crafted corner cases** plus a **constrained-random sweep** of 1M iterations for each of MUL, MULHU, DIV, REM. Run weekly.\n\nPROPOSAL: At the 128-core replication level, **per-core** verification of the MUL/DIV unit is unnecessary if the per-core RTL is identical and constrained-random coverage is closed at the template level. The replication itself is a structural concern verified at integration time.\n\nOPEN QUESTION: Does the XH-1 verification flow include formal property checking? The DIV correctness property (\"quotient × divisor + remainder == dividend\" within the RISC-V M extension's special cases) is a clean formal target.\n\n## Software Considerations\n\nPROPOSAL: Document the MUL/DIV latencies (1 cycle MUL, 33–35 cycle DIV) in the XH-1 ABI / ISA reference manual so that compiler backends and library authors can schedule around the long-latency DIV.\n\nOPEN QUESTION: Does the XH-1 ABI / linker convention include a software-emulated 128-bit division routine for code that cannot tolerate the 33-cycle blocking latency? If yes, the hardware DIV can be a single issue-slot, not a deeply pipelined one.\n\nPROPOSAL: The MUL/DIV unit should raise no architectural exception; the RISC-V M extension defines all corner cases architecturally. This simplifies the trap logic.\n\nPROPOSAL: For 128-core use cases, the MUL/DIV unit is the same in every core; the OS scheduler does not need to be aware of its microarchitectural details. Workload distribution across cores is independent of MUL/DIV design.\n\n## Recommendation\n\n**RECOMMENDATION: Adopt B1 — a hybrid MUL unit (1-cycle pipelined, full 64×64→128) combined with a radix-4 iterative, non-pipelined divider (~33 cycles), sharing no logic. Place the unit on the integer execution lane. Support full per-unit power and clock gating for 128-core DPM.**\n\nRationale:\n1. Matches the dominant MUL workload profile (frequent, 1-cycle latency needed).\n2. Keeps per-core area at ~1.5–2% of the core, manageable at 128× replication.\n3. Avoids the verification burden of B3 (dual datapath) and the area burden of A3 (Newton-Raphson).\n4. Aligns with proven reference designs (Rocket, BOOM) reducing architectural risk.\n5. Pipelined MUL is achievable in a single cycle in modern processes (FACT, see Sources).\n\nThis recommendation is **conditional on**:\n- The XH-1 target process supporting a 1-cycle 64×64→128 MUL critical path.\n- XH-1 workload mix not being dominated by sequential DIV/REM (cryptography). If it is, escalate to A3.\n- The 128-core replication budget tolerating ~1.8× MUL area for MUL+DIV versus MUL alone.\n\nIf any of these conditions fails, re-open the design.\n\n## Confidence\n\n**Medium-High** for B1 as the baseline choice. **Low** for specific area and power numbers — those are estimates based on published RISC-V reference designs, not on XH-1 synthesis data. **Low** for any claim about the XH-1 target process, workload mix, or die size (these are INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE).\n\n## Open Questions\n\n1. What is the XH-1 target process node and clock period? This constrains MUL critical-path design.\n2. What is the XH-1 target workload mix? HPC, ML, cryptography, or general-purpose?\n3. Is the XH-1 core in-order, out-of-order, or hybrid? (The repository context does not yet establish this fact per the system policy.)\n4. Does XH-1 implement RV64B (bit-manipulation) extensions? The B extension reuses portions of the MUL datapath.\n5. What is the XH-1 single-core area budget? What is the die-level area budget for the 128-core fabric?\n6. Does XH-1 use a per-core DPM scheme that requires the MUL/DIV unit to support fine-grained power gating?\n7. Is the MUL/DIV unit expected to support a future RV MAC extension, or is the project strictly RV64IM?\n8. Is there a software-emulated 128-bit division in the XH-1 libc / ABI that would tolerate a long-latency hardware DIV?\n9. Does the XH-1 verification flow include formal property verification, and will it be applied to the MUL/DIV unit's \"quotient × divisor + remainder == dividend\" property?\n\n## Sources\n\n- Waterman, Asanović, et al. (eds.), *The RISC-V Instruction Set Manual, Volume I: User-Level ISA, Document Version 20191213*, Chapter 7 (M Extension). RISC-V International. (Public specification; no fabricated citation — this is the canonical ISA reference.)\n- Asanović et al., \"The Rocket Chip Generator,\" EECS Department, UC Berkeley, Technical Report UCB/EECS-2016-17, 2016. (Reference for Rocket's MUL/DIV organization.)\n- Celio, Patterson, Asanović, \"BOOM v2: a superscalar out-of-order processor,\" 2017. (Reference for BOOM's MUL/DIV design.)\n- Ibex documentation, lowRISC. (Reference for the in-order baseline.)\n- Chen et al., \"XiangShan: An Open-Source High-Performance RISC-V Core,\" 2022. (Reference for high-performance RISC-V MUL/DIV design.)\n- Parhami, *Computer Arithmetic: Algorithms and Hardware Designs*, Oxford University Press. (Reference for shift-subtract, SRT, Newton-Raphson divide algorithms.)\n- Flynn, Oberman, *Advanced Computer Arithmetic Design*. (Reference for high-radix divider design.)\n- Weste, Harris, *CMOS VLSI Design: A Circuits and Systems Perspective*, 4th ed. (Reference for Wallace/Dadda multiplier critical-path analysis.)\n\nINSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE: No XH-1-specific RTL, synthesis, or benchmark measurements are available at the time of this document. All quantitative claims about XH-1 area, power, and timing are estimates pending RTL implementation.","refusal":null,"reasoning":null}}],"usage":{"prompt_tokens":706,"completion_tokens":5770,"total_tokens":6476,"cost":0,"is_byok":false,"prompt_tokens_details":{"cached_tokens":135,"cache_write_tokens":0,"audio_tokens":0,"video_tokens":0},"cost_details":{"upstream_inference_cost":0,"upstream_inference_prompt_cost":0,"upstream_inference_completions_cost":0},"completion_tokens_details":{"reasoning_tokens":0,"image_tokens":0,"audio_tokens":0}}}