DOCSLIB.ORG

XOS: an Application-Defined Operating System for Datacenter Computing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
XOS: an Application-Defined Operating System for Datacenter Computing XOS: An Application-Defined Operating System for Datacenter Computing Chen Zheng∗y, Lei Wang∗, Sally A. McKeez, Lixin Zhang∗, Hainan Yex and Jianfeng Zhan∗y ∗State Key Laboratory of Computer Architecture, Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences yUniversity of Chinese Academy of Sciences, China zChalmers University of Technology xBeijing Academy of Frontier Sciences and Technology Abstract—Rapid growth of datacenter (DC) scale, urgency of ability, and isolation. Such general-purpose, one-size-fits-all cost control, increasing workload diversity, and huge software designs simply cannot meet the needs of all applications. The investment protection place unprecedented demands on the op- kernel traditionally controls resource abstraction and alloca- erating system (OS) efficiency, scalability, performance isolation, and backward-compatibility. The traditional OSes are not built tion, which hides resource-management details but lengthens to work with deep-hierarchy software stacks, large numbers of application execution paths. Giving applications control over cores, tail latency guarantee, and increasingly rich variety of functionalities usually reserved for the kernel can streamline applications seen in modern DCs, and thus they struggle to meet systems, improving both individual performances and system the demands of such workloads. throughput [5]. This paper presents XOS, an application-defined OS for modern DC servers. Our design moves resource management There is a large and growing gap between what DC ap- out of the OS kernel, supports customizable kernel subsystems plications need and what commodity OSes provide. Efforts in user space, and enables elastic partitioning of hardware to bridge this gap range from bringing resource management resources. Specifically, XOS leverages modern hardware support into user space to bypassing the kernel for I/O operations, for virtualization to move resource management functionality avoiding cache pollution by batching system calls, isolat- out of the conventional kernel and into user space, which lets applications achieve near bare-metal performance. We implement ing performance via user-level cache control, and factoring XOS on top of Linux to provide backward compatibility. XOS OS structures for better scalability on many-core platforms. speeds up a set of DC workloads by up to 1.6× over our Nonetheless, several open issues remain. Most approaches to baseline Linux on a 24-core server, and outperforms the state- constructing kernel subsystems in user space only support of-the-art Dune by up to 3.3× in terms of virtual memory limited capabilities, leaving the traditional kernel responsible management. In addition, XOS demonstrates good scalability and strong performance isolation. for expensive activities like switching contexts, managing Index Terms—Operating System, Datacenter, Application- virtual memory, and handling interrupts. Furthermore, many defined, Scalability, Performance Isolation instances of such approaches cannot securely expose hardware resources to user space: applications must load code into the I. INTRODUCTION kernel (which can affect system stability). Implementations Modern DCs support increasingly diverse workloads that based on virtual machines incur overheads introduced by the process ever-growing amounts of data. To increase resource hypervisor layer. Finally, many innovative approaches break utilization, DC servers deploy multiple applications together current programming paradigms, sacrificing support for legacy on one node, but the interferences among these applications applications. and the OS lower individual performances and introduce Ideally, DC applications should be able to finely control unpredictability. Most state-of-the-practice and state-of-the-art their resources, customize kernel policies for their own ben- arXiv:1901.00825v1 [cs.OS] 3 Jan 2019 OSes (including Linux) were designed for computing envi- efit, avoid interference from the kernel or other application ronments that lack the support for diversity of resources and processes, and scale well with the number of available cores. workloads found in modern systems and DCs, respectively, From 2011 to 2016, in collaboration with Huawei, we have a and they present user-level software with abstracted interfaces large project to investigate different aspects of DC computing, to those hardware resources, whose policies are only optimized ranging from benchmarking [6], [7], architecture [8], hard- for a few specific classes of applications. ware [9], OS [4], and programming [10]. Specifically, we ex- In contrast, DCs need streamline OSes that can exploit plores two different OS architectures for DC computing [11]– 1 modern multi-core processors, reduce or remove the overheads [13]. This paper dedicates to XOS—an application-defined of resource allocation and management, and better support per- OS architecture that follows three main design principles: formance isolation. Although Linux has been widely adopted • Resource management should be separated from the OS as a preferred OS for its excellent usability and programma- kernel, which then merely provides resource multiplexing bility, it has limitations with respect to performance, scal- and protection. The corresponding author is Jianfeng Zhan. 1The another OS architecture for DC computing is reported in [4] p p A the system plus several important DC workloads. XOS outper- forms state-of-the-art systems like Linux and Dune/IX [14], Y S C A L L S [15] by up to 2.3× and 3.3×, respectively, for a virtual memory management microbenchmark. Compared to Linux, F S V XOS speeds up datacenter workloads from BigDataBench [7] U n i x D e v i c e i l e F by up to 70%. Furthermore, XOS scales 7× better on a 24-core I P C F i l e S y s t e m p p p A p A p A p S S e r v e r D r i v e r s r v e r e machine and performs 12× better when multiple memory- V i r t u a l c h e d u l e r S intensive microbenchmarks are deployed together. XOS keeps M e m o r y e v i c e I n t e r r u p t D tail latency — i.e., the time it takes to complete requests falling I P C V i r t u a l M e m o r y D i s p a t c h e r r i v e r s H a n d l e r D into the 99th latency percentile — in check while achieving much higher resource utilization. H a r d w a r e H a r d w a r e (a) monolithic (b) microkernel II. BACKGROUND AND RELATED WORK XOS is inspired by and built on much previous work in A p p A p p A p p A p p p p A p A p OSes to minimize the kernel, reduce competition for resources, L i b r a r y L i b r a r y O S M i r a g e v L i b r a S O S O and specialize functionalities for the needs of specific work- R u n t i m e V M loads. Each of these design goals addresses some, but not E x o k e r n e l y p e r v i s o r H all, of the requirements for DC workloads. Our application- defined OS model is made possible by hardware support for H a r d w a r e a r d w a r e H virtualizing CPU, memory, and I/O resources. (c) exokernel [1] (d) unikernel [2] Hardware-assisted virtualization goes back as far as the IBM System/370, whose VM/370 [16] operating system presented App each user (among hundreds or even thousands) with a separate App App App App App App App App App App App App App virtual machine having its own address space and virtual Single OS Image Single OS Image ® CPU CPU CPU Supervisor SubOS SubOS CPU CPU CPU Supervisor SubOS SubOS devices. For modern CPUs, technologies like Intel VT-x [17] driver driver driver driver driver driver break conventional CPU privilege modes into two new modes: Hardware Hardware Hardware Hardware VMX root mode and VMX non-root mode. (e) multikernel [3] (f) ITFS OS [4] For modern I/O devices, single root input/output virtualiza- tion (SR-IOV) [18] standard allows a network interface (in A p p A p p p p this case PCI Express, or PCI-e) to be safely shared among A p A p i n u x L several software entities. The kernel still manages physical X O S X O S R u n t i m e R u n t i m e e r n e l K device configuration, but each virtual device can be configured a r d w a r e H independently from user level. OS architectures have leveraged virtualization to better (g) XOS nokernel meet design goals spanning the need to support increasing Fig. 1: The difference of the XOS nokernel model from the hardware heterogeneity to provide better scalability, elasticity other OS models. with respect to resource allocation, fault tolerance, customiz- ability, and support for legacy applications. Most approaches break monolithic kernels into smaller components to specialize functionality and deliver more efficient performance and fault • Applications should be able to define user-space kernel isolation by moving many traditionally privileged activities out subsystems that give them direct resource access and of the kernel and into user space. customizable resource control. Early efforts like HURRICANE [19] and Hive [20] were • Physical resources should be partitioned such that appli- designed for scalable shared-memory (especially NUMA) cations have exclusive access to allocated resources. machines. They deliver greater scalability by implementing Our OS architecture provides several benefits. Applications microkernels (Figure 1b) based on hierarchical clustering. have direct control over hardware resources and direct access In contrast, exokernel architectures [1] (Figure 1c) sup- to kernel-specific functions; this streamlines execution paths port customizable application-level management of physical and avoids both kernel overheads and those of crossing be- resources.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Programmable Microkernel for Real-Time Systems∗
    A Programmable Microkernel for Real-Time Systems∗ Christoph M. Kirsch Marco A.A. Sanvido Thomas A. Henzinger University of Salzburg VMWare Inc. EPFL and UC Berkeley [email protected] tah@epfl.ch ABSTRACT Categories and Subject Descriptors We present a new software system architecture for the im- D.4.7 [Operating Systems]: Organization and Design— plementation of hard real-time applications. The core of the Real-time systems and embedded systems system is a microkernel whose reactivity (interrupt handling as in synchronous reactive programs) and proactivity (task General Terms scheduling as in traditional RTOSs) are fully programma- Languages ble. The microkernel, which we implemented on a Strong- ARM processor, consists of two interacting domain-specific Keywords virtual machines, a reactive E (Embedded) machine and a proactive S (Scheduling) machine. The microkernel code (or Real Time, Operating System, Virtual Machine microcode) that runs on the microkernel is partitioned into E and S code. E code manages the interaction of the system 1. INTRODUCTION with the physical environment: the execution of E code is In [9], we advocated the E (Embedded) machine as a triggered by environment interrupts, which signal external portable target for compiling hard real-time code, and in- events such as the arrival of a message or sensor value, and it troduced, in [11], the S (Scheduling) machine as a universal releases application tasks to the S machine. S code manages target for generating schedules according to arbitrary and the interaction of the system with the processor: the exe- possibly non-trivial strategies such as nonpreemptive and cution of S code is triggered by hardware interrupts, which multiprocessor scheduling.
    [Show full text]
  • Interrupt Handling in Linux
    Department Informatik Technical Reports / ISSN 2191-5008 Valentin Rothberg Interrupt Handling in Linux Technical Report CS-2015-07 November 2015 Please cite as: Valentin Rothberg, “Interrupt Handling in Linux,” Friedrich-Alexander-Universitat¨ Erlangen-Nurnberg,¨ Dept. of Computer Science, Technical Reports, CS-2015-07, November 2015. Friedrich-Alexander-Universitat¨ Erlangen-Nurnberg¨ Department Informatik Martensstr. 3 · 91058 Erlangen · Germany www.cs.fau.de Interrupt Handling in Linux Valentin Rothberg Distributed Systems and Operating Systems Dept. of Computer Science, University of Erlangen, Germany [email protected] November 8, 2015 An interrupt is an event that alters the sequence of instructions executed by a processor and requires immediate attention. When the processor receives an interrupt signal, it may temporarily switch control to an inter- rupt service routine (ISR) and the suspended process (i.e., the previously running program) will be resumed as soon as the interrupt is being served. The generic term interrupt is oftentimes used synonymously for two terms, interrupts and exceptions [2]. An exception is a synchronous event that occurs when the processor detects an error condition while executing an instruction. Such an error condition may be a devision by zero, a page fault, a protection violation, etc. An interrupt, on the other hand, is an asynchronous event that occurs at random times during execution of a pro- gram in response to a signal from hardware. A proper and timely handling of interrupts is critical to the performance, but also to the security of a computer system. In general, interrupts can be emitted by hardware as well as by software. Software interrupts (e.g., via the INT n instruction of the x86 instruction set architecture (ISA) [5]) are means to change the execution context of a program to a more privileged interrupt context in order to enter the kernel and, in contrast to hardware interrupts, occur synchronously to the currently running program.
    [Show full text]
  • Uva-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)
    UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) On the construction of operating systems for the Microgrid many-core architecture van Tol, M.W. Publication date 2013 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): van Tol, M. W. (2013). On the construction of operating systems for the Microgrid many-core architecture. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:27 Sep 2021 General Bibliography [1] J. Aas. Understanding the linux 2.6.8.1 cpu scheduler. Technical report, Silicon Graphics Inc. (SGI), Eagan, MN, USA, February 2005. [2] D. Abts, S. Scott, and D. J. Lilja. So many states, so little time: Verifying memory coherence in the Cray X1. In Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, IPDPS '03, page 10 pp., Washington, DC, USA, April 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • High Performance Computing Systems
    High Performance Computing Systems Multikernels Doug Shook Multikernels Two predominant approaches to OS: – Full weight kernel – Lightweight kernel Why not both? – How does implementation affect usage and performance? Gerolfi, et. al. “A Multi-Kernel Survey for High- Performance Computing,” 2016 2 FusedOS Assumes heterogeneous architecture – Linux on full cores – LWK requests resources from linux to run programs Uses CNK as its LWK 3 IHK/McKernel Uses an Interface for Heterogeneous Kernels – Resource allocation – Communication McKernel is the LWK – Only operable with IHK Uses proxy processes 4 mOS Embeds LWK into the Linux kernel – LWK is visible to Linux just like any other process Resource allocation is performed by sysadmin/user 5 FFMK Uses the L4 microkernel – What is a microkernel? Also uses a para-virtualized Linux instance – What is paravirtualization? 6 Hobbes Pisces Node Manager Kitten LWK Palacios Virtual Machine Monitor 7 Sysadmin Criteria Is the LWK standalone? Which kernel is booted by the BIOS? How and when are nodes partitioned? 8 Application Criteria What is the level of POSIX support in the LWK? What is the pseudo file system support? How does an application access Linux functionality? What is the system call overhead? Can LWK and Linux share memory? Can a single process span Linux and the LWK? Does the LWK support NUMA? 9 Linux Criteria Are LWK processes visible to standard tools like ps and top? Are modifications to the Linux kernel necessary? Do Linux kernel changes propagate to the LWK?
    [Show full text]
  • Additional Functions in HW-RTOS Offering the Low Interrupt Latency
    HW-RTOS Real Time OS in Hardware Additional Functions in HW-RTOS Offering the Low Interrupt Latency In this white paper, we introduce two HW-RTOS functions that offer the lowest interrupt latency available and help create a more software-friendly environment. One of these is ISR implemented in hardware, which improves responsiveness when activating a task from an interrupt and eliminates the need for developing a handler in software. The other is a function allowing the use of non-OS managed interrupt handlers in a multitasking environment. This makes it easier to migrate from a non-RTOS environment to a multitasking one. R70WP0003EJ0100 September, 2018 2 / 8 Multitasking Environment with Lowest Interrupt Latency Offered by HW-RTOS 1. Executive Summary In this white paper, we introduce two functions special to HW-RTOS that improve interrupt performance. The first is the HW ISR function. Renesas stylized the ISR (Interrupt Service Routine) process and implemented it in hardware to create their HW ISR. With this function, the task corresponding to the interrupt signal can be activated directly and in real time. And, since the ISR is implemented in the hardware, application software engineers are relieved of the burden of developing a handler. The second is called Direct Interrupt Service. This function is equivalent to allowing a non-OS managed interrupt handler to invoke an API. This function %" "$# $""%!$ $ $""%!$!" enables synchronization and communication "$ "$ between the non-OS managed interrupt handler and $($ $($ '$ '$ tasks, a benefit not available in conventional $ $ software. In other words, it allows the use of non-OS # $ % " "$) ) managed interrupt handlers in a multitasking $($ '$ environment.
    [Show full text]
  • W4118: Multikernel
    W4118: multikernel Instructor: Junfeng Yang References: Modern Operating Systems (3rd edition), Operating Systems Concepts (8th edition), previous W4118, and OS at MIT, Stanford, and UWisc Motivation: sharing is expensive Difficult to parallelize single-address space kernels with shared data structures . Locks/atomic instructions: limit scalability . Must make every shared data structure scalable • Partition data • Lock-free data structures • … . Tremendous amount of engineering Root cause . Expensive to move cache lines . Congestion of interconnect 1 Multikernel: explicit sharing via messages Multicore chip == distributed system! . No shared data structures! . Send messages to core to access its data Advantages . Scalable . Good match for heterogeneous cores . Good match if future chips don’t provide cache- coherent shared memory 2 Challenge: global state OS must manage global state . E.g., page table of a process Solution . Replicate global state . Read: read local copy low latency . Update: update local copy + distributed protocol to update remote copies • Do so asynchronously (“split phase”) 3 Barrelfish overview Figure 5 in paper CPU driver . kernel-mode part per core . Inter-Processor interrupt (IPI) Monitors . OS abstractions . User-level RPC (URPC) 4 IPC through shared memory #define CACHELINE (64) struct box{ char buf[CACHELINE-1]; // message contents char flag; // high bit == 0 means sender owns it }; __attribute__ ((aligned (CACHELINE))) struct box m __attribute__ ((aligned (CACHELINE))); send() recv() { { // set up message while(!(m.flag & 0x80)) memcpy(m.buf, …); ; m.flag |= 0x80; m.buf … //process message } } 5 Case study: TLB shootdown When is it necessary? Windows & Linux: send IPIs Barrelfish: sends messages to involved monitors . 1 broadcast message N-1 invalidates, N-1 fetches .
    [Show full text]
  • Interrupt Handling
    ,ch10.10847 Page 258 Friday, January 21, 2005 10:54 AM CHAPTER 10 Chapter 10 Interrupt Handling Although some devices can be controlled using nothing but their I/O regions, most real devices are a bit more complicated than that. Devices have to deal with the external world, which often includes things such as spinning disks, moving tape, wires to distant places, and so on. Much has to be done in a time frame that is differ- ent from, and far slower than, that of the processor. Since it is almost always undesir- able to have the processor wait on external events, there must be a way for a device to let the processor know when something has happened. That way, of course, is interrupts. An interrupt is simply a signal that the hardware can send when it wants the processor’s attention. Linux handles interrupts in much the same way that it handles signals in user space. For the most part, a driver need only register a handler for its device’s interrupts, and handle them properly when they arrive. Of course, underneath that simple picture there is some complexity; in particular, interrupt handlers are somewhat limited in the actions they can perform as a result of how they are run. It is difficult to demonstrate the use of interrupts without a real hardware device to generate them. Thus, the sample code used in this chapter works with the parallel port. Such ports are starting to become scarce on modern hardware, but, with luck, most people are still able to get their hands on a system with an available port.
    [Show full text]
  • Multiprocessor Operating Systems CS 6410: Advanced Systems
    Introduction Multikernel Tornado Conclusion Discussion Outlook References Multiprocessor Operating Systems CS 6410: Advanced Systems Kai Mast Department of Computer Science Cornell University September 4, 2014 Kai Mast — Multiprocessor Operating Systems 1/47 Introduction Multikernel Tornado Conclusion Discussion Outlook References Let us recall Multiprocessor vs. Multicore Figure: Multiprocessor [10] Figure: Multicore [10] Kai Mast — Multiprocessor Operating Systems 2/47 Introduction Multikernel Tornado Conclusion Discussion Outlook References Let us recall Message Passing vs. Shared Memory Shared Memory Threads/Processes access the same memory region Communication via changes in variables Often easier to implement Message Passing Threads/Processes don’t have shared memory Communication via messages/events Easier to distribute between different processors More robust than shared memory Kai Mast — Multiprocessor Operating Systems 3/47 Introduction Multikernel Tornado Conclusion Discussion Outlook References Let us recall Miscellaneous Cache Coherence Inter-Process Communication Remote-Procedure Call Preemptive vs. cooperative Multitasking Non-uniform memory access (NUMA) Kai Mast — Multiprocessor Operating Systems 4/47 Introduction Multikernel Tornado Conclusion Discussion Outlook References Current Systems are Diverse Different Architectures (x86, ARM, ...) Different Scales (Desktop, Server, Embedded, Mobile ...) Different Processors (GPU, CPU, ASIC ...) Multiple Cores and/or Multiple Processors Multiple Operating Systems on a System (Firmware,
    [Show full text]
  • Interrupt Handling with KSDK and Kinetis Design Studio
    Freescale Semiconductor Interrupt handling with KSDK and Kinetis Design Studio By: Jorge Gonzalez / Technical Information Center Freescale Semiconductor About this document The Kinetis Software Development Kit (KSDK) is intended for rapid evaluation and development with Kinetis family MCUs. Besides of the peripheral drivers, the hardware abstraction layer and middleware stacks, the platform provides a robust interrupt handling mechanism. This document explains the implementation and handling of interrupts when using KSDK in baremetal mode and when using MQX RTOS. Kinetis Design Studio IDE was used as reference, but the concepts should apply for any particular IDE supported by KSDK. Software versions The contents of this document are valid for the latest versions of Kinetis SDK and Kinetis Design Studio by the time of writing, listed below: . KSDK v1.2.0 . KDS v3.0.0 Content 1. GLOSSARY 2. CONCEPTS AND OVERVIEW 2.1 Interrupt Manager 2.2 Vector table location 2.3 Interrupt priorities 3. KSDK INTERRUPT HANDLING 3.1 Baremetal interrupt handling 3.2 MQX RTOS interrupt handling 3.3 Operating System Abstraction layer (OSA) 4. KDS AND PROCESSOR EXPERT CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 KSDK baremetal 4.2 KSDK baremetal + Processor Expert 4.3 MQX for KSDK 4.4 MQX for KSDK + Processor Expert 5. REFERENCES Interrupt handling with KSDK and Kinetis Design Studio 2 Freescale Semiconductor Freescale Semiconductor 1. GLOSSARY KSDK Kinetis Software Development Kit: Set of peripheral drivers, stacks and middleware layers for Kinetis microcontrollers. KDS Kinetis Design Studio: Integrated Development Environment (IDE) software for Kinetis MCUs. API Application Programming Interface: Refers to the set of functions, methods and macros provided by the different layers of the KSDK platform.
    [Show full text]
  • An Architectural Overview of QNX®
    An Architectural Overview of QNX® Dan Hildebrand Quantum Software Systems Ltd. 175 Terrence Matthews Kanata, Ontario K2M 1W8 Canada (613) 591-0931 [email protected] Abstract* This paper presents an architectural overview of the QNX operating system. QNX is an OS that provides applications with a fully network- and multi- processor-distributed, realtime environment that delivers nearly the full, device-level performance of the underlying hardware. The OS architecture used to deliver this operating environment is that of a realtime microkernel surrounded by a collection of optional processes that provide POSIX- and UNIX-compatible system services. By including or excluding various resource managers at run time, QNX can be scaled down for ROM-based embedded systems, or scaled up to encompass hundreds of processorsÅ either tightly or loosely connected by various LAN technologies. Confor- mance to POSIX standard 1003.1, draft standard 1003.2 (shell and utilities) and draft standard 1003.4 (realtime) is maintained transparently throughout the distributed environment. *This paper appeared in the Proceedings of the Usenix Workshop on Micro-Kernels & Other Kernel Architectures, Seattle, April, 1992. ISBN 1-880446-42-1 QNX is a registered trademark and FLEET is a trademark of Quantum Software Systems Ltd. Quantum Software Systems Ltd. An Architectural Overview of QNX® Architecture: Past and Present From its creation in 1982, the QNX architecture has been fundamentally similar to its current formÅthat of a very small microkernel (approximately 10K at that time) surrounded by a team of cooperating processes that provide higher-level OS services. To date, QNX has been used in nearly 200,000 systems, predominantly in applications where realtime performance, development flexibility, and network flexibility have been fundamental requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Design and Implementation of the Heterogeneous Multikernel Operating System
    223 Design and Implementation of the Heterogeneous Multikernel Operating System Yauhen KLIMIANKOU Department of Computer Systems and Networks, Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics, Belarus Abstract. The design of the computer system was significantly changed due to the emergence and popularization of the multicore processors. Moving to the advanced multicore processors, moving to the heterogeneous computer systems and increasing of the integrity level between computer system components are the main trends of the computer systems development. Significant changes in the computer systems design make reasonable the attempt of reviewing the operating system design to make it optimal for the new hardware platform. The proposed operation system design assume moving from monolithic centralized operating system to the decentralized network of the distributed independent nodes, each of which will play the role of the processor driver and threads container. The proposed design provide the numbers of the benefits against ordinal operating systems: dynamics in space and time, improved level of reliability and flexibility, support of the heterogeneous computer systems. Keywords. Multiprocessor computer system, heterogeneous computer system, real-time system Introduction Computer systems design is changing much faster than the operating systems design. The internal architecture of the modern computer resembles a distributed network system consisting from the mix of processor cores, caches, internal communications, I/O devices and expansion cards. The modern computer is similar to the early parallel computer systems or multiprocessor systems of the last century. Multi-core computer systems, which are essentially the same multi-processor systems localized on the processor die, occupy an increasingly strong position in most segments of the computer market.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Performance and Isolation of Asymmetric Microkernel Design For
    On the Performance and Isolation of Asymmetric Microkernel Design for Lightweight Manycores Pedro Henrique Penna, João Souto, Davidson Lima, Márcio Castro, François Broquedis, Henrique Freitas, Jean-François Mehaut To cite this version: Pedro Henrique Penna, João Souto, Davidson Lima, Márcio Castro, François Broquedis, et al.. On the Performance and Isolation of Asymmetric Microkernel Design for Lightweight Manycores. SBESC 2019 - IX Brazilian Symposium on Computing Systems Engineering, Nov 2019, Natal, Brazil. pp.1-31. hal-02297637v3 HAL Id: hal-02297637 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02297637v3 Submitted on 30 Mar 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. On the Performance and Isolation of Asymmetric Microkernel Design for Lightweight Manycores Pedro Henrique Penna, João Souto, Davidson Lima, Márcio Castro, François Broquedis, Henrique Freitas, Jean-Francois Mehaut To cite this version: Pedro Henrique Penna, João Souto, Davidson Lima, Márcio Castro, François Broquedis, et al.. On the Performance and Isolation of Asymmetric Microkernel
    [Show full text]