DOCSLIB.ORG

CH18 Parallel Processing =Multiple Processor Organization Single Instruction, Single Data Stream

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CH18 Parallel Processing =Multiple Processor Organization Single Instruction, Single Data Stream CH18 Parallel Processing =Multiple Processor Organization • {Multi-processor, Multi-computer} • Single instruction, single data stream - SISD • Multiple Processor Organizations • Single instruction, multiple data stream - SIMD • Symmetric Multiprocessors • Multiple instruction, single data stream - MISD • Cache Coherence and the MESI Protocol • Multiple instruction, multiple data stream- MIMD • Clusters • Non-Uniform Memory Access • Vector Computation TECH Computer Science Single Instruction, Single Data Stream - SISD Parallel Organizations - SISD • Single processor • Single instruction stream • Data stored in single memory • Uni-processor Single Instruction, Multiple Data Stream - SIMD Parallel Organizations - SIMD • Single machine instruction • Controls simultaneous execution • Number of processing elements • Lockstep basis • Each processing element has associated data memory • Each instruction executed on different set of data by different processors • Vector and array processors 1 Multiple Instruction, Multiple Instruction, Single Data Stream - MISD Multiple Data Stream- MIMD • Sequence of data • Set of processors • Transmitted to set of processors • Simultaneously execute different instruction • Each processor executes different instruction sequences sequence • Different sets of data • Never been implemented • SMPs, clusters, and NUMA systems Parallel Organizations - MIMD Shared Parallel Organizations - MIMD Memory Distributed Memory Taxonomy of Parallel Processor Architectures MIMD - Overview • General purpose processors • Each can process all instructions necessary • Further classified by method of processor communication 2 Block Diagram of Tightly Coupled Multiprocessor Tightly Coupled - SMP • Processors share memory • Communicate via that shared memory • Symmetric Multiprocessor (SMP) 4Share single memory or pool 4Shared bus to access memory 4Memory access time to given area of memory is approximately the same for each processor Tightly Coupled - NUMA Loosely Coupled - Clusters • Non-uniform memory access • Collection of independent uni-processors or SMPs • Access times to different regions of memory may • Interconnected to form a cluster differ • Communication via fixed path or network connections =Symmetric Multiprocessors SMP Advantages • A stand alone computer with the following characteristics • Performance 4 Two or more similar processors of comparable capacity 4If some work can be done in parallel 4 Processors share same memory and I/O • Availability 4 Processors are connected by a bus or other internal connection 4 Memory access time is approximately the same for each processor 4Since all processors can perform the same functions, 4 All processors share access to I/O failure of a single processor does not halt the system f Either through same channels or different channels giving paths to same • Incremental growth devices 4 All processors can perform the same functions (hence symmetric) 4User can enhance performance by adding additional 4 System controlled by integrated operating system processors f providing interaction between processors • Scaling f Interaction at job, task, file and data element levels 4Vendors can offer range of products based on number of processors 3 =Organization Classification (network) -Time Shared Bus • Time shared or common bus • Simplest form • Multiport memory • Structure and interface similar to single processor • Central control unit system • Following features provided 4Addressing - distinguish modules on bus 4Arbitration - any module can be temporary master 4Time sharing - if one module has the bus, others must wait and may have to suspend • Now have multiple processors as well as multiple I/O modules Time Share Bus - Advantages Time Share Bus - Disadvantage • Simplicity • Performance limited by bus cycle time • Flexibility • Each processor should have local cache • Reliability 4Reduce number of bus accesses • Leads to problems with cache coherence 4Solved in hardware - see later Multiport Memory – -Multiport Memory {many access ports} Advantages and Disadvantages • Direct independent access of memory modules by • More complex each processor 4Extra login in memory system • Logic required to resolve conflicts • Better performance • Little or no modification to processors or modules 4Each processor has dedicated path to each module required • Can configure portions of memory as private to one or more processors 4Increased security • Write through cache policy 4 -Central Control Unit =Operating System Issues • Funnels separate data streams between • Simultaneous concurrent processes independent modules (PE, Memory, I/O) • Scheduling • Can buffer requests • Synchronization • Performs arbitration and timing • Memory management • Pass status and control • Reliability and fault tolerance • Perform cache update alerting • Interfaces to modules remain the same • e.g. IBM S/370 =Cache Coherence Software Solutions • Problem - multiple copies of same data • Compiler and operating system deal with problem in different caches • Overhead transferred to compile time • Can result in an inconsistent view of memory • Design complexity transferred from hardware to • Write back policy can lead to inconsistency software • Write through can also give problems unless caches • However, software tends to make conservative monitor memory traffic decisions 4Inefficient cache utilization • Analyze code to determine safe periods for caching shared variables Hardware Solution Directory Protocols • Cache coherence protocols • Collect and maintain information about copies of data • Dynamic recognition of potential problems in cache • Run time • Directory stored in main memory • More efficient use of cache • Requests are checked against directory • Transparent to programmer • Appropriate transfers are performed • Directory protocols • Creates central bottleneck • Snoopy protocols • Effective in large scale systems with complex interconnection schemes 5 Snoopy Protocols Write Invalidate • Distribute cache coherence responsibility among • Multiple readers, one writer cache controllers • When a write is required, all other caches of the line • Cache recognizes that a line is shared are invalidated • Updates announced to other caches • Writing processor then has exclusive (cheap) access • Suited to bus based multiprocessor until line required by another processor • Increases bus traffic • Used in Pentium II and PowerPC systems • State of every line is marked as modified, exclusive, shared or invalid • MESI Write Update MESI State Transition Diagram • Multiple readers and writers • Updated word is distributed to all other processors • Some systems use an adaptive mixture of both solutions =Clusters Cluster Benefits • Alternative to SMP • Absolute scalability • High performance • Incremental scalability • High availability • High availability • Server applications • Superior price/performance • A group of interconnected whole computers • Working together as unified resource • Illusion of being one machine • Each computer called a node 6 Cluster Configurations - Standby Server, Cluster Configurations - No Shared Disk Shared Disk Cluster Configurations Operating Systems Issues // • Passive standby • Failure management • Active secondary 4Highly available • Separate servers 4Failover 4Failback • Servers connected to disks • Load balancing • Servers share disks =Non-Uniform Memory Access Clusters v SMP NUMA • Both use multiple processors for high demand • Uniform memory access applications 4All processors have access to all pats of main memory • SMP is easier to manage 4Access time to all regions of memory the same 4Access time by all processors the same • SMP takes less physical space and less power • Non-uniform memory Access • SMP established and stable technology 4All processors have access to all memory using load and • Clusters are better for incremental and absolute store scalability 4Access time depends on region of memory being accessed • Clusters are better for availability 4Different processors access different regions of memory at different speeds • Cache-coherent NUMA 4Cache coherence is maintained 7 CC-NUMA Organization NUMA Pros and Cons • Effective performance at higher level of parallelism than SMP • Not transparently like SMP 4Need software changes • Availability Required Reading • Stallings Chapter 16 8.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comparative Performance Evaluation of Cache-Coherent NUMA and COMA Architectures Abstract 1 Introduction
    Comparative Performance Evaluation of Cache-Coherent NUMA and COMA Architectures Per Stenstromt, Truman Joe, and Anoop Gupta Computer Systems Laboratory Stanford University, CA 94305 Abstract machine. Currently, many research groups are pursuing the design and construction of such multiprocessors [12, 1, 10]. Two interesting variations of large-scale shared-memory ma- As research has progressed in this area, two interesting vari- chines that have recently emerged are cache-coherent mm- ants have emerged, namely CC-NUMA (cache-coherent non- umform-memory-access machines (CC-NUMA) and cache- uniform memory access machines) and COMA (cache-only only memory architectures (COMA). They both have dis- memory architectures). Examples of the CC-NUMA ma- tributed main memory and use directory-based cache coher- chines are the Stanford DASH multiprocessor [12] and the MIT ence. Unlike CC-NUMA, however, COMA machines auto- Alewife machine [1], while examples of COMA machines are matically migrate and replicate data at the main-memoty level the Swedish Institute of Computer Science’s Data Diffusion in cache-line sized chunks. This paper compares the perfor- Machine (DDM) [10] and Kendall Square Research’s KSR1 mance of these two classes of machines. We first present a machine [4]. qualitative model that shows that the relative performance is Common to both CC-NUMA and COMA machines are the primarily determined by two factors: the relative magnitude features of distributed main memory, scalable interconnection of capacity misses versus coherence misses, and the gramr- network, and directory-based cache coherence. Distributed hirity of data partitions in the application. We then present main memory and scalable interconnection networks are es- quantitative results using simulation studies for eight prtraUeI sential in providing the required scalable memory bandwidth, applications (including all six applications from the SPLASH while directory-based schemes provide cache coherence with- benchmark suite).
    [Show full text]
  • Detailed Cache Coherence Characterization for Openmp Benchmarks
    1 Detailed Cache Coherence Characterization for OpenMP Benchmarks Anita Nagarajan, Jaydeep Marathe, Frank Mueller Dept. of Computer Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7534 [email protected], phone: (919) 515-7889 Abstract models in their implementation (e.g., [6], [13], [26], [24], [2], [7]), and they operate at different abstraction levels Past work on studying cache coherence in shared- ranging from cycle-accuracy over instruction-level to the memory symmetric multiprocessors (SMPs) concentrates on operating system interface. On the performance tuning end, studying aggregate events, often from an architecture point work mostly concentrates on program analysis to derive op- of view. However, this approach provides insufficient infor- timized code (e.g., [15], [27]). Recent processor support for mation about the exact sources of inefficiencies in paral- performance counters opens new opportunities to study the lel applications. For SMPs in contemporary clusters, ap- effect of applications on architectures with the potential to plication performance is impacted by the pattern of shared complement them with per-reference statistics obtained by memory usage, and it becomes essential to understand co- simulation. herence behavior in terms of the application program con- In this paper, we concentrate on cache coherence simu- structs — such as data structures and source code lines. lation without cycle accuracy or even instruction-level sim- The technical contributions of this work are as follows. ulation. We constrain ourselves to an SPMD programming We introduce ccSIM, a cache-coherent memory simulator paradigm on dedicated SMPs. Specifically, we assume the fed by data traces obtained through on-the-fly dynamic absence of workload sharing, i.e., only one application runs binary rewriting of OpenMP benchmarks executing on a on a node, and we enforce a one-to-one mapping between Power3 SMP node.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.5 Classification of Parallel Computers
    52 // Architectures 2.5 Classification of Parallel Computers 2.5 Classification of Parallel Computers 2.5.1 Granularity In parallel computing, granularity means the amount of computation in relation to communication or synchronisation Periods of computation are typically separated from periods of communication by synchronization events. • fine level (same operations with different data) ◦ vector processors ◦ instruction level parallelism ◦ fine-grain parallelism: – Relatively small amounts of computational work are done between communication events – Low computation to communication ratio – Facilitates load balancing 53 // Architectures 2.5 Classification of Parallel Computers – Implies high communication overhead and less opportunity for per- formance enhancement – If granularity is too fine it is possible that the overhead required for communications and synchronization between tasks takes longer than the computation. • operation level (different operations simultaneously) • problem level (independent subtasks) ◦ coarse-grain parallelism: – Relatively large amounts of computational work are done between communication/synchronization events – High computation to communication ratio – Implies more opportunity for performance increase – Harder to load balance efficiently 54 // Architectures 2.5 Classification of Parallel Computers 2.5.2 Hardware: Pipelining (was used in supercomputers, e.g. Cray-1) In N elements in pipeline and for 8 element L clock cycles =) for calculation it would take L + N cycles; without pipeline L ∗ N cycles Example of good code for pipelineing: §doi =1 ,k ¤ z ( i ) =x ( i ) +y ( i ) end do ¦ 55 // Architectures 2.5 Classification of Parallel Computers Vector processors, fast vector operations (operations on arrays). Previous example good also for vector processor (vector addition) , but, e.g. recursion – hard to optimise for vector processors Example: IntelMMX – simple vector processor.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Multiprocessors and Thread-Level Parallelism
    Computer Architecture A Quantitative Approach, Fifth Edition Chapter 5 Multiprocessors and Thread-Level Parallelism Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1 Contents 1. Introduction 2. Centralized SMA – shared memory architecture 3. Performance of SMA 4. DMA – distributed memory architecture 5. Synchronization 6. Models of Consistency Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 2 1. Introduction. Why multiprocessors? Need for more computing power Data intensive applications Utility computing requires powerful processors Several ways to increase processor performance Increased clock rate limited ability Architectural ILP, CPI – increasingly more difficult Multi-processor, multi-core systems more feasible based on current technologies Advantages of multiprocessors and multi-core Replication rather than unique design. Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 3 Introduction Multiprocessor types Symmetric multiprocessors (SMP) Share single memory with uniform memory access/latency (UMA) Small number of cores Distributed shared memory (DSM) Memory distributed among processors. Non-uniform memory access/latency (NUMA) Processors connected via direct (switched) and non-direct (multi- hop) interconnection networks Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 4 Important ideas Technology drives the solutions. Multi-cores have altered the game!! Thread-level parallelism (TLP) vs ILP. Computing and communication deeply intertwined. Write serialization exploits broadcast communication
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis and Optimization of I/O Cache Coherency Strategies for Soc-FPGA Device
    Analysis and Optimization of I/O Cache Coherency Strategies for SoC-FPGA Device Seung Won Min Sitao Huang Mohamed El-Hadedy Electrical and Computer Engineering Electrical and Computer Engineering Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Illinois University of Illinois California State Polytechnic University Urbana, USA Urbana, USA Ponoma, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Jinjun Xiong Deming Chen Wen-mei Hwu IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Electrical and Computer Engineering Electrical and Computer Engineering Yorktown Heights, USA University of Illinois University of Illinois [email protected] Urbana, USA Urbana, USA [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—Unlike traditional PCIe-based FPGA accelerators, However, choosing the right I/O cache coherence method heterogeneous SoC-FPGA devices provide tighter integrations for different applications is a challenging task because of between software running on CPUs and hardware accelerators. it’s versatility. By choosing different methods, they can intro- Modern heterogeneous SoC-FPGA platforms support multiple I/O cache coherence options between CPUs and FPGAs, but these duce different types of overheads. Depending on data access options can have inadvertent effects on the achieved bandwidths patterns, those overheads can be amplified or diminished. In depending on applications and data access patterns. To provide our experiments, we find using different I/O cache coherence the most efficient communications between CPUs and accelera- methods can vary overall application execution times at most tors, understanding the data transaction behaviors and selecting 3.39×. This versatility not only makes designers hard to decide the right I/O cache coherence method is essential.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Thread-Level Parallelism
    Chapter 5 Thread-Level Parallelism Instructor: Josep Torrellas CS433 Copyright Josep Torrellas 1999, 2001, 2002, 2013 1 Progress Towards Multiprocessors + Rate of speed growth in uniprocessors saturated + Wide-issue processors are very complex + Wide-issue processors consume a lot of power + Steady progress in parallel software : the major obstacle to parallel processing 2 Flynn’s Classification of Parallel Architectures According to the parallelism in I and D stream • Single I stream , single D stream (SISD): uniprocessor • Single I stream , multiple D streams(SIMD) : same I executed by multiple processors using diff D – Each processor has its own data memory – There is a single control processor that sends the same I to all processors – These processors are usually special purpose 3 • Multiple I streams, single D stream (MISD) : no commercial machine • Multiple I streams, multiple D streams (MIMD) – Each processor fetches its own instructions and operates on its own data – Architecture of choice for general purpose mps – Flexible: can be used in single user mode or multiprogrammed – Use of the shelf µprocessors 4 MIMD Machines 1. Centralized shared memory architectures – Small #’s of processors (≈ up to 16-32) – Processors share a centralized memory – Usually connected in a bus – Also called UMA machines ( Uniform Memory Access) 2. Machines w/physically distributed memory – Support many processors – Memory distributed among processors – Scales the mem bandwidth if most of the accesses are to local mem 5 Figure 5.1 6 Figure 5.2 7 2. Machines w/physically distributed memory (cont) – Also reduces the memory latency – Of course interprocessor communication is more costly and complex – Often each node is a cluster (bus based multiprocessor) – 2 types, depending on method used for interprocessor communication: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Parallel Programming
    Parallel Programming Parallel Programming Parallel Computing Hardware Shared memory: multiple cpus are attached to the BUS all processors share the same primary memory the same memory address on different CPU’s refer to the same memory location CPU-to-memory connection becomes a bottleneck: shared memory computers cannot scale very well Parallel Programming Parallel Computing Hardware Distributed memory: each processor has its own private memory computational tasks can only operate on local data infinite available memory through adding nodes requires more difficult programming Parallel Programming OpenMP versus MPI OpenMP (Open Multi-Processing): easy to use; loop-level parallelism non-loop-level parallelism is more difficult limited to shared memory computers cannot handle very large problems MPI(Message Passing Interface): require low-level programming; more difficult programming scalable cost/size can handle very large problems Parallel Programming MPI Distributed memory: Each processor can access only the instructions/data stored in its own memory. The machine has an interconnection network that supports passing messages between processors. A user specifies a number of concurrent processes when program begins. Every process executes the same program, though theflow of execution may depend on the processors unique ID number (e.g. “if (my id == 0) then ”). ··· Each process performs computations on its local variables, then communicates with other processes (repeat), to eventually achieve the computed result. In this model, processors pass messages both to send/receive information, and to synchronize with one another. Parallel Programming Introduction to MPI Communicators and Groups: MPI uses objects called communicators and groups to define which collection of processes may communicate with each other.
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Hardware Architecture Lecture 4
    Computer Hardware Architecture Lecture 4 Manfred Liebmann Technische Universit¨atM¨unchen Chair of Optimal Control Center for Mathematical Sciences, M17 [email protected] November 10, 2015 Manfred Liebmann November 10, 2015 Reading List • Pacheco - An Introduction to Parallel Programming (Chapter 1 - 2) { Introduction to computer hardware architecture from the parallel programming angle • Hennessy-Patterson - Computer Architecture - A Quantitative Approach { Reference book for computer hardware architecture All books are available on the Moodle platform! Computer Hardware Architecture 1 Manfred Liebmann November 10, 2015 UMA Architecture Figure 1: A uniform memory access (UMA) multicore system Access times to main memory is the same for all cores in the system! Computer Hardware Architecture 2 Manfred Liebmann November 10, 2015 NUMA Architecture Figure 2: A nonuniform memory access (UMA) multicore system Access times to main memory differs form core to core depending on the proximity of the main memory. This architecture is often used in dual and quad socket servers, due to improved memory bandwidth. Computer Hardware Architecture 3 Manfred Liebmann November 10, 2015 Cache Coherence Figure 3: A shared memory system with two cores and two caches What happens if the same data element z1 is manipulated in two different caches? The hardware enforces cache coherence, i.e. consistency between the caches. Expensive! Computer Hardware Architecture 4 Manfred Liebmann November 10, 2015 False Sharing The cache coherence protocol works on the granularity of a cache line. If two threads manipulate different element within a single cache line, the cache coherency protocol is activated to ensure consistency, even if every thread is only manipulating its own data.
    [Show full text]
  • Real-Time Performance During CUDA™ a Demonstration and Analysis of Redhawk™ CUDA RT Optimizations
    A Concurrent Real-Time White Paper 2881 Gateway Drive Pompano Beach, FL 33069 (954) 974-1700 www.concurrent-rt.com Real-Time Performance During CUDA™ A Demonstration and Analysis of RedHawk™ CUDA RT Optimizations By: Concurrent Real-Time Linux® Development Team November 2010 Overview There are many challenges to creating a real-time Linux distribution that provides guaranteed low process-dispatch latencies and minimal process run-time jitter. Concurrent Real Time’s RedHawk Linux distribution meets and exceeds these challenges, providing a hard real-time environment on many qualified hardware configurations, even in the presence of a heavy system load. However, there are additional challenges faced when guaranteeing real-time performance of processes while CUDA applications are simultaneously running on the system. The proprietary CUDA driver supplied by NVIDIA® frequently makes demands upon kernel resources that can dramatically impact real-time performance. This paper discusses a demonstration application developed by Concurrent to illustrate that RedHawk Linux kernel optimizations allow hard real-time performance guarantees to be preserved even while demanding CUDA applications are running. The test results will show how RedHawk performance compares to CentOS performance running the same application. The design and implementation details of the demonstration application are also discussed in this paper. Demonstration This demonstration features two selectable real-time test modes: 1. Jitter Mode: measure and graph the run-time jitter of a real-time process 2. PDL Mode: measure and graph the process-dispatch latency of a real-time process While the demonstration is running, it is possible to switch between these different modes at any time.
    [Show full text]
  • Trafficdb: HERE's High Performance Shared-Memory Data Store
    TrafficDB: HERE’s High Performance Shared-Memory Data Store Ricardo Fernandes Piotr Zaczkowski Bernd Gottler¨ HERE Global B.V. HERE Global B.V. HERE Global B.V. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Conor Ettinoffe Anis Moussa HERE Global B.V. HERE Global B.V. conor.ettinoff[email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT HERE's traffic-aware services enable route planning and traf- fic visualisation on web, mobile and connected car appli- cations. These services process thousands of requests per second and require efficient ways to access the information needed to provide a timely response to end-users. The char- acteristics of road traffic information and these traffic-aware services require storage solutions with specific performance features. A route planning application utilising traffic con- gestion information to calculate the optimal route from an origin to a destination might hit a database with millions of queries per second. However, existing storage solutions are not prepared to handle such volumes of concurrent read Figure 1: HERE Location Cloud is accessible world- operations, as well as to provide the desired vertical scalabil- wide from web-based applications, mobile devices ity. This paper presents TrafficDB, a shared-memory data and connected cars. store, designed to provide high rates of read operations, en- abling applications to directly access the data from memory. Our evaluation demonstrates that TrafficDB handles mil- HERE is a leader in mapping and location-based services, lions of read operations and provides near-linear scalability providing fresh and highly accurate traffic information to- on multi-core machines, where additional processes can be gether with advanced route planning and navigation tech- spawned to increase the systems' throughput without a no- nologies that helps drivers reach their destination in the ticeable impact on the latency of querying the data store.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Cache Coherence Traffic with a NUMA-Aware Runtime Approach
    This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPDS.2017.2787123, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PARALLEL AND DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS, VOL. XX, NO. X, MONTH YEAR 1 Reducing Cache Coherence Traffic with a NUMA-Aware Runtime Approach Paul Caheny, Lluc Alvarez, Said Derradji, Mateo Valero, Fellow, IEEE, Miquel Moreto,´ Marc Casas Abstract—Cache Coherent NUMA (ccNUMA) architectures are a widespread paradigm due to the benefits they provide for scaling core count and memory capacity. Also, the flat memory address space they offer considerably improves programmability. However, ccNUMA architectures require sophisticated and expensive cache coherence protocols to enforce correctness during parallel executions, which trigger a significant amount of on- and off-chip traffic in the system. This paper analyses how coherence traffic may be best constrained in a large, real ccNUMA platform comprising 288 cores through the use of a joint hardware/software approach. For several benchmarks, we study coherence traffic in detail under the influence of an added hierarchical cache layer in the directory protocol combined with runtime managed NUMA-aware scheduling and data allocation techniques to make most efficient use of the added hardware. The effectiveness of this joint approach is demonstrated by speedups of 3.14x to 9.97x and coherence traffic reductions of up to 99% in comparison to NUMA-oblivious scheduling and data allocation. Index Terms—Cache Coherence, NUMA, Task-based programming models F 1 INTRODUCTION HE ccNUMA approach to memory system architecture the data is allocated within the NUMA regions of the system T has become a ubiquitous choice in the design-space [10], [28].
    [Show full text]
  • Unit: 4 Processes and Threads in Distributed Systems
    Unit: 4 Processes and Threads in Distributed Systems Thread A program has one or more locus of execution. Each execution is called a thread of execution. In traditional operating systems, each process has an address space and a single thread of execution. It is the smallest unit of processing that can be scheduled by an operating system. A thread is a single sequence stream within in a process. Because threads have some of the properties of processes, they are sometimes called lightweight processes. In a process, threads allow multiple executions of streams. Thread Structure Process is used to group resources together and threads are the entities scheduled for execution on the CPU. The thread has a program counter that keeps track of which instruction to execute next. It has registers, which holds its current working variables. It has a stack, which contains the execution history, with one frame for each procedure called but not yet returned from. Although a thread must execute in some process, the thread and its process are different concepts and can be treated separately. What threads add to the process model is to allow multiple executions to take place in the same process environment, to a large degree independent of one another. Having multiple threads running in parallel in one process is similar to having multiple processes running in parallel in one computer. Figure: (a) Three processes each with one thread. (b) One process with three threads. In former case, the threads share an address space, open files, and other resources. In the latter case, process share physical memory, disks, printers and other resources.
    [Show full text]