Modern HBM-based memory systems have evolved over generations while retaining cache line granularity accesses. Preserving this fine granularity necessitated the introduction of bank groups and pseudo channels. These structures expand timing parameters and control overhead, significantly increasing memory controller scheduling complexity. Large language models (LLMs) now dominate deep learning workloads, streaming contiguous data blocks ranging from several kilobytes to megabytes per operation. In a conventional HBM-based memory system, these transfers are fragmented into hundreds of 32B cache line transactions. This forces the memory controller to employ unnecessarily intricate scheduling, leading to growing inefficiency. To address this problem, we propose RoMe. RoMe accesses DRAM at row granularity and removes columns, bank groups, and pseudo channels from the memory interface. This design simplifies memory scheduling, thereby requiring fewer pins per channel. The freed pins are aggregated to form additional channels, increasing overall bandwidth by$\text{1 2. 5 \%}$with minimal extra pins. RoMe demonstrates how memory scheduling logic can be significantly simplified for representative LLM workloads, and presents an alternative approach for next-generation HBM-based memory systems achieving increased bandwidth with minimal hardware overhead.

A decade after its academic introduction, RowHammer (RH) remains a moving target that continues to challenge both the industry and academia. With its potential to serve as a critical attack vector, the ever-decreasing RH threshold now threatens DRAM process technology scaling, with a superlinearly increasing cost of RH protection solutions. Due to their generality and relatively lower performance costs, architectural RH solutions are the first line of defense against RH. However, the field is fragmented with varying views of the problem, terminologies, and even threat models. In this paper, we systematize architectural RH defenses from the last decade through the lens of streaming algorithms. We provide a taxonomy that encompasses 48 different works. We map multiple architectural RH defenses to the classical streaming algorithms, which extends to multiple proposals that did not identify this link. We also provide two practitioner guides. The first guide analyzes which algorithm best fits a given RHTH, location, process technology, storage type, and mitigative action. The second guide encourages future research to consult existing algorithms when architecting RH defenses. We illustrate this by demonstrating how Reservoir-Sampling can improve related RH defenses, and also introduce StickySampling that can provide mathematical security that related studies do not guarantee.