lock vs lock free memory n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Lock vs. Lock-Free memory PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Lock vs. Lock-Free memory

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 19

Lock vs. Lock-Free memory - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 104 Views
  • Uploaded on

Lock vs. Lock-Free memory. Fahad Alduraibi, Aws Ahmad, and Eman Elrifaei. Outline . CPU vs. Memory performance development Single-core vs. Multi-core CPU Synchronization Lock-based Transactional Memory (TM) Related Research Lock-based vs. STM performance Methodology Expected results

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

Lock vs. Lock-Free memory


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
  1. Lock vs. Lock-Free memory Fahad Alduraibi, Aws Ahmad, and Eman Elrifaei

  2. Outline • CPU vs. Memory performance development • Single-core vs. Multi-core CPU • Synchronization • Lock-based • Transactional Memory (TM) • Related Research • Lock-based vs. STM performance • Methodology • Expected results • References

  3. 107x 106x 105x 104x 103x 102x 10x 1x Growth CPU speed improvement Memory latency improvement 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 CPU vs. Memory performance

  4. Intro. Multi-core Dual Core CPU Chip CPU Core and L1 Cache Bus Interface and L2 Cache Main Memory CPU Core and L1 Cache

  5. Multi-core CPU • Advs. • Higher clock rates for cash coherency • Increased data processing • Decreased latency • Challenges • OS Support • Software Adjustment • Synchronization (shared data)

  6. Synchronization • Synchronizing concurrent access to shared memory by multiple threads • Lock Based Synchronization • Coarse-grained Locking • Fine-grained Locking • Lock Free Synchronization • Transactional Memory

  7. Lock-Based Synchronization • if (lock == 0) lock = myPID; /* lock free - set it */ • Drawbacks • Deadlock • Priority inversion • Finer-grained locks  Complex & Overhead Thread 1 Thread 2 Lock

  8. Transactional Memory Synch. • Lock-free controlling access to shared memory in concurrent computing. • Transactions are atomic: e.g.Swap (a,b); • Executes completely (commits) or has no effect (aborts) • A transaction runs in isolation (serialization) temp = a; a = b; b = temp;

  9. TM Advantages • Easier parallel programming. • Good parallel performance. • Eliminates deadlocks. • Avoids priority inversion and convoying. • Fault tolerance (in case a thread dies).

  10. TM Implementations Hybrid TM Hardware TM Software TM Fast but limited Slow but flexible Uses both HTM & STM

  11. Related research • McRT-STM: A High Performance Software Transactional Memory System for a Multi-core Runtime • Compared performance between STM different Schemes • Also compared performance between STM and locks with a set of programs • Built in C++ • Measurements done on 16-processor IBM x445 SMP system with Xeon MP 2.2 Ghz Running Redhat EL3

  12. Related research • Hybrid-TM • implementation of both software and hardware transactional memory schemes. Hybrid Transactional Memory. By: Sanjeev Kumar† Michael Chu‡ Christopher J. Hughes† Partha Kundu† Anthony Nguyen† †Intel Labs, Santa Clara, CA ‡University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Trans in Trans out HW SW System resources

  13. Lock-based vs. STM performance • Recent Research Studies showed that STM can perform as good as Fine-Grain Lock-Based system Source: “McRT-STM: A High Performance Software Transactional Memory System for a Multi-Core Runtime”

  14. Lock-based vs. STM performance • The performance is application dependent too Source: “McRT-STM: A High Performance Software Transactional Memory System for a Multi-Core Runtime”

  15. Our Methodology • Comparing Performance of Lock-Based Synchronization System with SXM Software Transactional System • Building a benchmark to run programs written with locks • The benchmark will be programmed in C# Language • The inputs (parameters) to the benchmark will be (Program name, #threads) • The output of the benchmark is execution time

  16. Our Methodology (Cont.) • To Measure Execution time • Record Start Time • Loop for number of Iterations • Record End Time • Subtract End Time – Start Time, divide by number of Iterations • Many Iterations are used to calculate the performance accurately • Different scenarios can be applied to calculate the average

  17. Expected Results Execution Time

  18. References • M. Herlihy and J. E. B. Moss. Transactional memory: Architectural support for lock-free data structures. In Proc. 20th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture, pages 289–300,May 1993. • N. Shavit and D. Touitou. Software transactional memory. Distributed Computing, Special Issue(10):99–116, 1997. • S. Kumar, M. Chu, C. J. Hughes, P. Kundu, and A. Nguyen. Hybrid transactional memory. In Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming, Mar. 2006. • McRT-STM: A High Performance Software Transactional Memory System for a Multi-Core Runtime • “How to Write High-Performance C# Code" By: Jeff Varszegi, .NET Developer's Journal • Wikipedia.org

  19. Thanks