1 / 37

Computer Applications

Elect 707. Computer Applications. Chapter 3 Instruction Level Parallelism 2. Dr. Eng. Amr T. Abdel-Hamid. Spring 2014. Text book slides: Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach 4th Edition, John L. Hennessy  &  David A. Patterso with modifications. Getting CPI < 1.

ruthjacobs
Download Presentation

Computer Applications

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Elect 707 Computer Applications Chapter 3 Instruction Level Parallelism 2 Dr. Eng. Amr T. Abdel-Hamid Spring 2014 Text book slides: Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach 4th Edition, John L. Hennessy  &  David A. Patterso with modifications.

  2. Getting CPI < 1 • CPI ≥ 1 if issue only 1 instruction every clock cycle • Scalar vs superscalar processors. • Multiple-issue processors come in 3 flavors: • statically-scheduled superscalar processors, • dynamically-scheduled superscalar processors, and • VLIW (very long instruction word) processors • The 2 types of superscalarprocessors issue varying numbers of instructions per clock • use in-order execution if they are statically scheduled, or • out-of-order execution if they are dynamically scheduled

  3. VLIW: Very Large Instruction Word • VLIW processors issue a fixed number of instructions formatted either as one large instruction or as a fixed instruction packet with the parallelism among instructions explicitly indicated by the instruction (Intel/HP Itanium) • Each “instruction” has explicit coding for multiple operations • In IA-64, grouping called a “packet” • In Transmeta, grouping called a “molecule” (with “atoms” as ops)

  4. VLIW: Very Large Instruction Word • Tradeoff instruction space for simple decoding • The long instruction word has room for many operations • By definition, all the operations the compiler puts in the long instruction word are independent => execute in parallel • E.g., 2 integer operations, 2 FP ops, 2 Memory refs, 1 branch • 16 to 24 bits per field => 7*16 or 112 bits to 7*24 or 168 bits wide • Need compiling technique that schedules across several branches

  5. Unrolled Loop that Minimizes Stalls for Scalar 1 Loop: L.D F0,0(R1) 2 L.D F6,-8(R1) 3 L.D F10,-16(R1) 4 L.D F14,-24(R1) 5 ADD.D F4,F0,F2 6 ADD.D F8,F6,F2 7 ADD.D F12,F10,F2 8 ADD.D F16,F14,F2 9 S.D 0(R1),F4 10 S.D -8(R1),F8 11 S.D -16(R1),F12 12 DSUBUI R1,R1,#32 13 BNEZ R1,LOOP 14 S.D 8(R1),F16 ; 8-32 = -24 14 clock cycles, or 3.5 per iteration L.D to ADD.D: 1 Cycle ADD.D to S.D: 2 Cycles

  6. Loop Unrolling in VLIW Memory Memory FP FP Int. op/ Clockreference 1 reference 2 operation 1 op. 2 branch L.D F0,0(R1) L.D F6,-8(R1) 1 L.D F10,-16(R1) L.D F14,-24(R1) 2 L.D F18,-32(R1) L.D F22,-40(R1) ADD.D F4,F0,F2 ADD.D F8,F6,F2 3 L.D F26,-48(R1) ADD.D F12,F10,F2 ADD.D F16,F14,F2 4 ADD.D F20,F18,F2 ADD.D F24,F22,F2 5 S.D 0(R1),F4 S.D -8(R1),F8 ADD.D F28,F26,F2 6 S.D -16(R1),F12 S.D -24(R1),F16 7 S.D -32(R1),F20 S.D -40(R1),F24 DSUBUI R1,R1,#4 8 S.D -0(R1),F28 BNEZ R1,LOOP 9 Unrolled 7 times to avoid delays 7 results in 9 clocks, or 1.3 clocks per iteration (1.8X) Note: Need more registers in VLIW (15 vs. 6 in SS) & much more H/W

  7. Problems with 1st Generation VLIW • Increase in code size • generating enough operations in a straight-line code fragment requires ambitiously unrolling loops • whenever VLIW instructions are not full, unused functional units translate to wasted bits in instruction encoding • Operated in lock-step; no hazard detection HW • a stall in any functional unit pipeline caused entire processor to stall, since all functional units must be kept synchronized • Compiler might prediction function units, but caches hard to predict • Binary code compatibility • Pure VLIW => different numbers of functional units and unit latencies require different versions of the code

  8. Putting it ALL together • Seen how the individual mechanisms of: • dynamic scheduling, • multiple issue, • and speculation • Put all three together which yields a microarchitecture quite similar to those in modern microprocessors. • For simplicity, we consider only an issue rate of two instructions per clock. • Let’s assume we want to extend Tomasulo’s algorithm to support a two-issue superscalar pipeline with a separate integer and floating-point units.

  9. Example: Loop: LD R2,0(R1) ;R2=array element DADDIU R2,R2,#1 ;increment R2 SD R2,0(R1) ;store result DADDIU R1,R1,#8 ;increment pointer BNE R2,R3,LOOP ;branch if not last element

  10. Tomasulo’s algorithm

  11. Tomasulo’s algorithm with Speculation

  12. Limits to ILP • Conflicting studies of amount • Benchmarks (vectorized Fortran FP vs. integer C programs) • Hardware sophistication • Compiler sophistication • How much ILP is available using existing mechanisms with increasing HW budgets? • Do we need to invent new HW/SW mechanisms to keep on processor performance curve? • Intel MMX, SSE (Streaming SIMD Extensions): 64 bit ints • Intel SSE2: 128 bit, including 2 64-bit Fl. Pt. per clock • Motorola AltaVec: 128 bit ints and FPs • Supersparc Multimedia ops, etc.

  13. The Model Processor Assumptions for ideal/perfect machine to start: • Register renaming – infinite virtual registers => all register WAW & WAR hazards are avoided • Branch prediction – perfect; no mispredictions • Jump prediction – all jumps perfectly predicted (returns, case statements) • 2 & 3 Zero control dependencies; perfect speculation & an unbounded buffer of instructions available • Memory-address alias analysis – addresses known & a load can be moved before a store provided addresses not equal; => 1 & 4 eliminates all but RAW Also: • perfect caches; • 1 cycle latency for all instructions (FP *,/); • unlimited instructions issued/clock cycle;

  14. Limits to ILP HW Model comparison

  15. Benchmark programs showed • Three of these benchmarks (fpppp, doduc, and tomcatv) are floating-point intensive, and the other three are integer programs. • Two of the floating-point benchmarks (fpppp and tomcatv) have extensive parallelism, • could be exploited by a vector computer or by a multiprocessor. • The program li is a LISP interpreter that has many short dependences.

  16. Upper Limit to ILP: Ideal Machine(Figure 3.1) FP: 75 - 150 Integer: 18 - 60 Instructions Per Clock

  17. Maximum Issue Count: Instruction Window Size • What the perfect processor must do: • Look arbitrarily far ahead to find a set of instructions to issue, predicting all branches perfectly. • Rename all register uses to avoid WAR and WAW hazards. • Determine whether there are any data dependences among the instructions in the issue packet; if so, rename accordingly. • Determine if any memory dependences exist among the issuing instructions and handle them appropriately. • Provide enough replicated functional units to allow all the ready instructions to issue. • # of comparisons to check for Data Dependency:

  18. Limiting the Instruction Window • Limit window size to n (no longer arbitrary) • Window = number of instructions that are candidates for concurrent execution in a cycle • Window size determines • Instruction storage needed within the pipeline • Maximum issue rate • Number of operand comparisons needed for dependence checking is O(n2) • To try and detect dependences among 2000 instructions would require some 4 million comparisons • Issuing 50 instructions requires 2450 comparisons

  19. Limits to ILP HW Model comparison

  20. More Realistic HW: Window ImpactFigure 3.2 Change from Infinite window 2048, 512, 128, 32 FP: 9 - 150 Integer: 8 - 63 IPC

  21. Limits to ILP HW Model comparison

  22. Branch Impact

  23. More Realistic HW: Branch Impact Perfect Tournament BHT (512) Profile No prediction FP: 15 - 45 Change from Infinite window to examine to 2048 and maximum issue of 64 instructions per clock cycle Integer: 6 - 12 IPC

  24. Limits to ILP HW Model comparison

  25. More Realistic HW: Renaming Register Impact (N int + N fp) Change 2048 instr window, 64 instr issue, 8K 2 level Prediction FP: 11 - 45 Integer: 5 - 15 IPC

  26. Performance beyond single thread ILP • There can be much higher natural parallelism in some applications (e.g., Database or Scientific codes) • Explicit Thread Level Parallelism or Data Level Parallelism • Thread: process with own instructions and data • thread may be a process part of a parallel program of multiple processes, or it may be an independent program • Each thread has all the state (instructions, data, PC, register state, and so on) necessary to allow it to execute • Data Level Parallelism: Perform identical operations on data, and lots of data

  27. Thread Level Parallelism (TLP) • ILP exploits implicit parallel operations within a loop or straight-line code segment • TLP explicitly represented by the use of multiple threads of execution that are inherently parallel • Goal: Use multiple instruction streams to improve • Throughput of computers that run many programs • Execution time of multi-threaded programs • TLP could be more cost-effective to exploit than ILP

  28. New Approach: Multithreaded Execution • Multithreading: multiple threads to share the functional units of 1 processor via overlapping • processor must duplicate independent state of each thread e.g., a separate copy of register file, a separate PC, and for running independent programs, a separate page table • memory shared through the virtual memory mechanisms, which already support multiple processes • HW for fast thread switch; much faster than full process switch  100s to 1000s of clocks • When switch? • Alternate instruction per thread (fine grain) • When a thread is stalled, perhaps for a cache miss, another thread can be executed (coarse grain)

  29. Fine-Grained Multithreading • Switches between threads on each instruction, causing the execution of multiples threads to be interleaved • Usually done in a round-robin fashion, skipping any stalled threads • CPU must be able to switch threads every clock • Advantage is it can hide both short and long stalls, since instructions from other threads executed when one thread stalls • Disadvantage is it slows down execution of individual threads, since a thread ready to execute without stalls will be delayed by instructions from other threads • )

  30. Course-Grained Multithreading • Switches threads only on costly stalls, such as L2 cache misses • Advantages • Relieves need to have very fast thread-switching • Doesn’t slow down thread, since instructions from other threads issued only when the thread encounters a costly stall • Disadvantage is hard to overcome throughput losses from shorter stalls, due to pipeline start-up costs • Since CPU issues instructions from 1 thread, when a stall occurs, the pipeline must be emptied or frozen • New thread must fill pipeline before instructions can complete • Because of this start-up overhead, coarse-grained multithreading is better for reducing penalty of high cost stalls, where pipeline refill << stall time • Used in IBM AS/400

  31. Multithreaded Categories Simultaneous Multithreading Multiprocessing Superscalar Fine-Grained Coarse-Grained Time (processor cycle) Thread 1 Thread 3 Thread 5 Thread 2 Thread 4 Idle slot

  32. For most apps, most execution units lie idle From: Tullsen, Eggers, and Levy, “Simultaneous Multithreading: Maximizing On-chip Parallelism, ISCA 1995.

  33. Do both ILP and TLP? • TLP and ILP exploit two different kinds of parallel structure in a program • Could a processor oriented at ILP to exploit TLP? • functional units are often idle in data path designed for ILP because of either stalls or dependences in the code • Could the TLP be used as a source of independent instructions that might keep the processor busy during stalls? • Could TLP be used to employ the functional units that would otherwise lie idle when insufficient ILP exists?

  34. Simultaneous Multi-threading ... One thread, 8 units Two threads, 8 units Cycle M M FX FX FP FP BR CC Cycle M M FX FX FP FP BR CC M = Load/Store, FX = Fixed Point, FP = Floating Point, BR = Branch, CC = Condition Codes

  35. Simultaneous Multithreading (SMT) • Simultaneous multithreading (SMT): insight that dynamically scheduled processor already has many HW mechanisms to support multithreading • Large set of virtual registers that can be used to hold the register sets of independent threads • Register renaming provides unique register identifiers, so instructions from multiple threads can be mixed in datapath without confusing sources and destinations across threads • Out-of-order completion allows the threads to execute out of order, and get better utilization of the HW • Just adding a per thread renaming table and keeping separate PCs • Independent commitment can be supported by logically keeping a separate reorder buffer for each thread Source: Micrprocessor Report, December 6, 1999 “Compaq Chooses SMT for Alpha”

  36. Multithreaded Pipeline Example • Slide from Joel Emer

  37. Sun Niagara Multithreaded Pipeline

More Related