The Vector-Thread Architecture

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Vector-Thread Architecture THE VECTOR-THREAD ARCHITECTURE THE VECTOR-THREAD (VT) ARCHITECTURE SUPPORTS A SEAMLESS INTERMINGLING OF VECTOR AND MULTITHREADED COMPUTATION TO FLEXIBLY AND COMPACTLY ENCODE APPLICATION PARALLELISM AND LOCALITY. VT PROCESSORS EXPLOIT THIS ENCODING TO PROVIDE HIGH PERFORMANCE WITH LOW POWER AND SMALL AREA. As embedded computing applica- purpose processors are flexible, they are often tions become more sophisticated, the demand too large, too slow, or burn too much power for high-performance, low-power information for embedded computing. In particular, mod- processing grows. Custom circuits provide the ern superscalars expend considerable hardware optimal solution for any processing task, but resources to dynamically extract limited par- rising mask and development costs limit appli- allelism from sequential encodings of unstruc- cation-specific chips to devices that will be sold tured applications. All-purpose processors Ronny Krashinsky in very high volumes. Even then, hardwired have a different goal. Embedded applications circuits are unsuitable for designs that must often contain abundant structured paral- Christopher Batten rapidly adapt to changing requirements. Pro- lelism, where dependencies can be determined grammable domain-specific processors are a statically. The challenge is to develop an Mark Hampton more flexible alternative, and they have evolved instruction set architecture that flexibly to exploit particular forms of parallelism com- encodes parallel dependency graphs and Steve Gerding mon to certain classes of embedded applica- improves the performance-efficiency of tions. Examples include digital signal processor implementations. Brian Pharris processors, media processors, network proces- sors, and field-programmable gate arrays. Full Vector-thread architectural paradigm Jared Casper systems, however, often require a heteroge- The vector-thread (VT) architectural para- neous mix of these cores to be competitive on digm describes a class of architectures that Krste Asanovi´c complex workloads with a variety of process- unify the vector and multithreaded execution ing tasks. The resulting devices have multiple models. VT architectures compactly encode Massachusetts Institute of instruction sets with different parallel execu- large amounts of structured parallelism in a tion and synchronization models, making form that lets simple microarchitectures attain Technology them difficult to program. They are also inef- high performance at low power by avoiding ficient when the application workload causes complex control and datapath structures and load imbalance across the heterogeneous cores. by reducing activity on long wires. Ideally, a single all-purpose programmable architecture would efficiently exploit the dif- Abstract model ferent types of parallelism and locality present A VT programming model combines vec- in embedded applications. Although general- tor and multithreaded computation. A con- 84 Published by the IEEE Computer Society 0272-1732/04/$20.00 2004 IEEE Control vector-fetch processor cross-VP pop VP0 VP0VP1 VP0VP2 VP0VPN thread- vector- cross-VP load fetch push Regs Regs Regs Regs vector- store cross-VP ALUs ALUs ALUs ALUs queue Memory Figure 1. Abstract model of a vector-thread architecture. A control processor interacts with a vector of virtual processors (VPs). Control Control processor VP0 VP1 VP2 VPN processor VP0 VP1 VP2 VPN vector-load ld ld ld ld vector-load ld ld ld ld vector-load ld ld ld ld vector-fetch vector-fetch ld ld ld ld Atomic + + + + == == == == instruction block (AIB) >> >> >> >> br br br br vector-store st st st st ld ld ld thread- (a) == fetch == == Control br br br processor VP0 VP1 VP2 VPN ld vector-load ld ld ld ld == vector-fetch + + + + br cross-VP queue >> >> >> >> vector-store st st st st vector-store st st st st (b) (c) Figure 2. Mapping code to the vector-thread architecture: vectorizable loops (a), loops with cross-iteration dependencies (b), and loops with internal control flow (c). ventional control processor interacts with a loop iteration, and the control processor strip- vector of virtual processors (VPs), as Figure 1 mines the execution and factors out common shows. A virtual processor contains a set of bookkeeping overhead. To execute data-par- registers and can execute groups of RISC-like allel code, the control processor uses vector- instructions packaged into atomic instruction fetch commands to broadcast AIBs to all VPs, blocks (AIBs). VPs have no automatic pro- as Figure 2a shows. The control processor can gram counter or implicit instruction fetch also use vector-load and vector-store com- mechanism; rather, all instruction blocks must mands to efficiently move vectors of data be explicitly requested by either the control between memory and the VP registers. To processor or the VP itself. allow efficient mapping of loop-carried depen- Although we can map applications to VT dencies to VT, VPs are connected in a uni- in several ways, VT is especially well suited to directional ring topology, with pairs of sending executing loops. Each VP executes a single and receiving instructions transferring data NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2004 85 MICRO TOP PICKS Command Control processor Lane 0 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Command management unit Command management unit Command management unit Command management unit cmd-Q thread-fetch cmd-Q thread-fetch cmd-Q thread-fetch cmd-Q thread-fetch addr. AIB AIB AIB AIB tags tags tags tags miss Execution cluster Execution cluster Execution cluster Execution cluster VP12 VP13 VP14 VP15 Execute VP8 Execute VP9 Execute VP10 Execute VP11 cross-VP directive directive directive directive queue VP4 VP5 VP6 VP7 VP0 VP1 VP2 VP3 AIB fill unit VP VP VP VP Vector AIB AIB AIB AIB ALU ALU ALU ALU memory cache cache cache cache unit Level-1 cache Figure 3. Physical model of a VT machine. The implementation shown has four parallel lanes in the vector-thread unit (VTU), and VPs are striped across the lane array. directly between them, as Figure 2b illustrates. Physical model In contrast to software pipelining on VLIW A VT machine contains a conventional architectures, the compiler or programmer control processor and a vector-thread unit need only schedule code for one loop iteration (VTU) that executes the VP code, as Figure 3 mapped to one VP, and the hardware dynam- illustrates. To exploit the parallelism exposed ically schedules the cross-VP data transfers to by the VT abstract model, the VTU contains resolve when the data becomes available. a parallel array of processing lanes. Each lane To execute loop iterations with condition- contains physical registers, which hold the als or even inner loops, each VP directs its own state of VPs mapped to the lane, and func- control flow using thread fetches to fetch its tional units, which are time-multiplexed AIBs, as Figure 2c shows. By allowing soft- across the VPs. ware to freely intermingle vector and thread Unlike traditional vector machines, in a VT fetches, a VT architecture can combine the machine the lanes execute decoupled from best attributes of the vector and multithread- each other, and each lane has a small AIB ed execution paradigms. The control proces- cache. A lane’s command management unit sor can issue a vector-fetch command to (CMU) buffers commands from the control launch a vector of VP threads, each of which processor in a queue (cmd-Q) and holds continues to execute as long as the VP issues pending thread-fetch addresses for the lane’s thread fetches. Thread fetches break the rigid VPs. The CMU chooses a vector-fetch or control flow of traditional vector machines, thread-fetch command to process, and looks letting the VPs follow independent control up its address in the AIB cache tags. After pro- paths. By letting VPs conditionally branch, cessing an AIB cache hit or miss refill, the VT provides more efficient execution of large CMU generates an execute directive contain- conditionals than traditional vector masking. ing an index to the AIB cache. For a vector- Thread fetches also let outer-loop parallelism fetch command, the execute directive map naturally to VT, as VPs can execute indicates that all VPs should execute the AIB; inner-loop iterations that have little or no for a thread-fetch command, it identifies a sin- available parallelism. In addition to executing gle VP to execute the AIB. The CMU sends loop iterations, VPs can serve as free-running execute directives to a queue, and it can over- threads, operating independently from the lap the AIB cache refill for new fetch com- control processor and retrieving tasks from a mands with the execution of previous ones. shared work queue. To process an execute directive, the execu- 86 IEEE MICRO tion cluster reads VP instructions one by one use a conventional cache to amplify memory from the AIB cache and executes them for the bandwidth and tolerate long memory laten- appropriate VP. When processing an execute cies, and avoid complicating the software directive from a vector-fetch command, the interface with a hierarchical vector (or stream) execution cluster executes all of the instruc- register file.5,6 tions in the AIB for one VP before moving on To evaluate Scale’s performance and flexi- to the next. bility, we mapped a diverse selection of embedded benchmarks (including examples Scale VT processor from cryptography and image, audio, and net- The Scale architecture, an instantiation of work processing) from the Embedded Micro- the VT paradigm, aims to provide high per- processor Benchmark Consortium (EEMBC) formance at low power for a wide range of and other suites. The results in Tables 1 and embedded applications while using only a 2 are based on a detailed execution-driven small area. The planned Scale prototype simulator,1 and they represent a snapshot of includes a MIPS-RISC control processor, 32 our ongoing progress in optimizing the Kbytes of cache, and a four-lane vector-thread microarchitecture and benchmark mappings. unit that can execute 16 operations per cycle The simulator modeled a four-lane Scale con- and supports up to 128 simultaneously active figuration running at 400 MHz with a 64-bit virtual processor threads.
Recommended publications
  • An Architectural Trail to Threaded-Code Systems
    Some programmers question certain claims made for threaded-code systems. The author defends these claims by tracing such a system from its origin in simple concepts. An Architectural Trail to Threaded-Code Systems Peter M. Kogge, IBM Federal Systems Division Interest in software systems based on threaded-code * the concepts and syntax of a high-order language, or concepts has grown remarkably in recent years. Ad- HOL; and vocates of such systems regularly make claims for them * a set of commands for a conversational monitor. that many classical programmers regard as bordering on The ISA (such as it is) is for an abstract machine that is the impossible. Typically, proponents claim that it is very efficiently implemented by short code segments in possible to construct, in 5K to 10K bytes of code, a soft- almost any current machine architecture. The HOL con- ware package that cepts include hierarchical construction of programs, * is conversational like APL, Lisp, or Basic; block structures, GOTOless programming, and user- * includes a compile facility with many high-order definable data structures. The commands for the conver- language, structured-programming constructs; sational monitor permit direct interaction with objects * exhibits performance very close to that of machine- defined by the programmer in terms he defines, not sim- coded program equivalents; ply in the terms of the underlying machine (i.e., core * is written largely in itself and consequently is largely dumps). Further, the command set is directly executable portable; in a conversational mode and includes virtually all com- * places no barriers among combinations of system, mands available in the system; when so executed, they compiler, or application code; function just as they would if found in an executed pro- * can include an integrated, user-controlled virtual gram.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Threads Programming: Standards and Strategy
    Basic Threads Programming: Standards and Strategy Mike Dahlin [email protected] February 13, 2007 1 Motivation Some people rebel against coding standards. I don’t understand the logic. For concurrent programming in particular, there are a few good solutions that have stood the test of time (and many unhappy people who have departed from these solutions.) For concurrent programming, debugging won’t work. You must rely on (a) writing correct code and (b) writing code that you and others can read and understand. Following the rules below will help you write correct, readable code. Rules 2 through 6 below are required coding standards for CS372. Answers to homework and exam problems and project code that do not follow these standards are by definition incorrect. Section 5 discusses additional restrictions for project code (or exam pseudo-code) in Java. Again, answers that deviate from these required coding standars are, by definition, incorrect for this class. If you believe you have a better way to write concurrent programs, that’s great! Bring it to us (before you use it on an assignment!) We will examine your approach the same way we hope that a civil engineering manager would examine a proposal by a bright young civil engineer who has a proposal for a better config- uration of rebar for reinforcing a new bridge: we will hope you have found a better way, but the burden of proof for explaining the superiority of your approach and proving that there are no hidden pitfalls is on you. 2 Coding standards for concurrent programs: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Effective Inline-Threaded Interpretation of Java Bytecode
    Effective Inline-Threaded Interpretation of Java Bytecode Using Preparation Sequences Etienne Gagnon1 and Laurie Hendren2 1 Sable Research Group Universit´eduQu´ebec `a Montr´eal, [email protected] 2 McGill University Montreal, Canada, [email protected] Abstract. Inline-threaded interpretation is a recent technique that im- proves performance by eliminating dispatch overhead within basic blocks for interpreters written in C [11]. The dynamic class loading, lazy class initialization, and multi-threading features of Java reduce the effective- ness of a straight-forward implementation of this technique within Java interpreters. In this paper, we introduce preparation sequences, a new technique that solves the particular challenge of effectively inline-threa- ding Java. We have implemented our technique in the SableVM Java virtual machine, and our experimental results show that using our tech- nique, inline-threaded interpretation of Java, on a set of benchmarks, achieves a speedup ranging from 1.20 to 2.41 over switch-based inter- pretation, and a speedup ranging from 1.15 to 2.14 over direct-threaded interpretation. 1 Introduction One of the main advantages of interpreters written in high-level languages is their simplicity and portability, when compared to static and dynamic compiler-based systems. One of their main drawbacks is poor performance, due to a high cost for dispatching interpreted instructions. In [11], Piumarta and Riccardi introduced a technique called inlined-threading which reduces this overhead by dynamically inlining instruction sequences within basic blocks, leaving a single instruction dispatch at the end of each sequence. To our knowledge, inlined-threading has not been applied to Java interpreters before.
    [Show full text]
  • Threaded Code Is Not in Fact Implemented in the Computer's Hardware
    desired generality in others. In summary, when writing hard code the user needs relatively many instructions, each of which executes relatively rapidly. An interpreter, by contrast, is a vehicle by which the user can choose his own instruction set to correspond Programming R. Morris to his specific problem. Obviously such freedom allows Techniques Editor a much shorter program for that: problem to be written. The penalty is that the instruction set of the interpreter Threaded Code is not in fact implemented in the computer's hardware. Instead the interpreter must itself be a computer pro- James R. Bell gram which simulates the action of the interpretive in- Digital Equipment Corporation struction set in terms of the actual instruction set. This can be a time-consuming proposition. Thus interpretive code tends to be shorter but slower than hard code. The concept of "threaded code" is presented as an It is instructive to look at the relation between the alternative to machine language code. Hardware and host hardware and the alternatives discussed. In the software realizations of it are given. In software it is case of hard code an instruction directs the flow of realized as interpretive code not needing an interpreter. processing by its actual execution from the IR, or in- Extensions and optimizations are mentioned. struction register, of the machine. In the case of an in- Key Words and Phrases: interpreter, machine code, terpreter, an "instruction" is in fact merely a datum time tradeoff, space tradeoff, compiled code, subroutine from the interpreting program. Thus it directs the flow calls, threaded code of processing from an accumulator or the equivalent.
    [Show full text]
  • Csc 453 Interpreters & Interpretation
    CSc 453 Interpreters & Interpretation Saumya Debray The University of Arizona Tucson Interpreters An interpreter is a program that executes another program. An interpreter implements a virtual machine , which may be different from the underlying hardware platform. Examples: Java Virtual Machine; VMs for high-level languages such as Scheme, Prolog, Icon, Smalltalk, Perl, Tcl. The virtual machine is often at a higher level of semantic abstraction than the native hardware. This can help portability, but affects performance. CSc 453: Interpreters & Interpretation 2 1 Interpretation vs. Compilation CSc 453: Interpreters & Interpretation 3 Interpreter Operation ip = start of program; while ( ¬ done ) { op = current operation at ip ; execute code for op on current operands; advance ip to next operation; } CSc 453: Interpreters & Interpretation 4 2 Interpreter Design Issues Encoding the operation I.e., getting from the opcode to the code for that operation (“dispatch”): byte code (e.g., JVM) indirect threaded code direct threaded code. Representing operands register machines: operations are performed on a fixed finite set of global locations (“registers”) (e.g.: SPIM); stack machines: operations are performed on the top of a stack of operands (e.g.: JVM). CSc 453: Interpreters & Interpretation 5 Byte Code Operations encoded as small integers (~1 byte). The interpreter uses the opcode to index into a table of code addresses: while ( TRUE ) { byte op = ∗∗∗ip; switch ( op ) { case ADD: … perform addition ; break; case SUB: … perform subtraction ; break; … } } Advantages: simple, portable. Disadvantages: inefficient. CSc 453: Interpreters & Interpretation 6 3 Direct Threaded Code Indexing through a jump table (as with byte code) is expensive. Idea : Use the address of the code for an operation as the opcode for that operation.
    [Show full text]
  • Static Analysis of Lockless Microcontroller C Programs
    Static Analysis of Lockless Microcontroller C Programs Eva Beckschulze Sebastian Biallas Stefan Kowalewski Embedded Software Laboratory RWTH Aachen University, Germany {lastname}@embedded.rwth-aachen.de Concurrently accessing shared data without locking is usually a subject to race conditions resulting in inconsistent or corrupted data. However, there are programs operating correctly without locking by exploiting the atomicity of certain operations on a specific hardware. In this paper, we describe how to precisely analyze lockless microcontroller C programs with interrupts by taking the hardware architecture into account. We evaluate this technique in an octagon-based value range analysis using access-based localization to increase efficiency. 1 Introduction Static analysis based on abstract interpretation [7] is a formal method that found its way into practice by several commercial code analysis tools. Proving the absence of run-time errors in microcontroller programs is of particular importance as microcontrollers are often deployed in safety-critical systems. However, C code analyzers usually do not cope with C extensions and hardware-specific control prevalent in microcontroller programs. This control is not only necessary for data input/output but also needed to implement interrupt service routines (ISRs), which allows some form of concurrency and can be used for asynchronous hardware communication and periodic tasks. Since the control functions of the hardware are often exposed through normal memory accesses, a sound analysis of microcontroller programs has to reflect these registers in its memory model. On the Atmega16 [2], for example, it is possible to enable/disable interrupts by a write to the SREG register which is located at the memory address 0x5F.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study of Multi-Threading in the Embedded Space
    A Case Study of Multi-Threading in the Embedded Space Greg Hoover Forrest Brewer Timothy Sherwood University of California, Santa University of California, Santa University of California, Santa Barbara Barbara Barbara Engineering I Engineering I Engineering I Santa Barbara, California Santa Barbara, California Santa Barbara, California 93106 93106 93106 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT vironment. Such systems open the possibility of early de- The continuing miniaturization of technology coupled with tection of structural failure, tracking microclimates in for- wireless networks has made it feasible to physically embed est canopies, and observing migratory patterns of any num- sensor network systems into the environment. Sensor net ber of species [16, 11, 29]. In an ideal world, these tiny processors are tasked with the job of handling a disparate digital systems would be operating a wireless network, han- set of interrupt driven activity, from networks to timers to dling sensor readings, controlling electro-statically-activated the sensors themselves. In this paper, we demonstrate the devices, processing software updates, and performing dis- advantages of a tiny multi-threaded microcontroller design tributed computations. To handle all of these functions at which targets embedded applications that need to respond the required throughput, we argue for the use of dynamic to events at high speed. While multi-threading is typically multi-threading at all levels of the microcontroller design. used to improve resource utilization, in the embedded space At first this concept may seem counterintuitive as most it can provide zero-cycle context switching and interrupt ser- multi-threaded architectures were developed to better-exploit vice threads (IST), enabling complex programmable control an abundance of resources [25], something that these sys- in latency constrained environments.
    [Show full text]
  • The Flow Programming Language: an Implicitly-Parallelizing, Programmer-Safe Language
    ““WriteWrite Once,Once, ParallelizeParallelize Anywhere”Anywhere” TheThe FlowFlow ProgrammingProgramming Language:Language: AnAn implicitly-parallelizing,implicitly-parallelizing, programmer-safeprogrammer-safe languagelanguage Luke Hutchison Moore'sMoore's LawLaw ● TheThe numbernumber ofof transistorstransistors thatthat cancan bebe placedplaced inexpensivelyinexpensively onon anan integratedintegrated circuitcircuit hashas doubleddoubled approximatelyapproximately everyevery twotwo years.years. Moore'sMoore's LawLaw ● ComputingComputing isis work;work; transistorstransistors dodo work;work; moremore transistorstransistors workingworking inin parallelparallel shouldshould yieldyield fasterfaster computerscomputers ● =>=> Moore'sMoore's LawLaw hashas (so(so far)far) alsoalso appliedapplied toto CPUCPU speedspeed ● BUTBUT nownow we'rewe're hittinghitting multiplemultiple walls:walls: ● TransistorTransistor sizesize – tunneling;tunneling; lithographylithography featurefeature sizesize vs.vs. wavelengthwavelength – nono moremore 2D2D densitydensity increasesincreases ● ThermalThermal envelopeenvelope – functionfunction ofof frequencyfrequency andand featurefeature sizesize =>=> wewe havehave hithit aa clockspeedclockspeed wallwall ● DataData widthwidth – 128-bit128-bit CPUs?CPUs? NeedNeed parallelparallel controlcontrol flowflow insteadinstead ButBut it'sit's worseworse thanthan thatthat It'sIt's notnot justjust thethe endend ofof Moore'sMoore's Law...Law... ...it's...it's thethe beginningbeginning ofof anan eraera ofof buggierbuggier software.software.
    [Show full text]
  • Virtual Machine Showdown: Stack Versus Registers
    Virtual Machine Showdown: Stack Versus Registers Yunhe Shi, David Gregg, Andrew Beatty M. Anton Ertl Department of Computer Science Institut f¨urComputersprachen University of Dublin, Trinity College TU Wien Dublin 2, Ireland Argentinierstraße 8 {yshi, David.Gregg, A-1040 Wien, Austria Andrew.Beatty}@cs.tcd.ie [email protected] ABSTRACT be interpreted or compiled. The most popular VMs, such as Virtual machines (VMs) are commonly used to distribute the Java VM, use a virtual stack architecture, rather than programs in an architecture-neutral format, which can eas- the register architecture that dominates in real processors. ily be interpreted or compiled. A long-running question in A long-running question in the design of VMs is whether the design of VMs is whether stack architecture or register stack architecture or register architecture can be implemented architecture can be implemented more efficiently with an more efficiently with an interpreter. On the one hand stack interpreter. We extend existing work on comparing virtual architectures allow smaller VM code so less code must be stack and virtual register architectures in two ways. Firstly, fetched per VM instruction executed. On the other hand, our translation from stack to register code is much more stack machines require more VM instructions for a given sophisticated. The result is that we eliminate an average computation, each of which requires an expensive (usually of more than 47% of executed VM instructions, with the unpredictable) indirect branch for VM instruction dispatch. register machine bytecode size only 25% larger than that of Several authors have discussed the issue [12, 15, 11, 16] and the corresponding stack bytecode.
    [Show full text]
  • Multiple Cores + SIMD + Threads) (And Their Performance Characteristics
    Lecture 2: Modern Multi-Core Architecture: (multiple cores + SIMD + threads) (and their performance characteristics) CMU 15-418: Parallel Computer Architecture and Programming (Spring 2012) Announcements ▪ WWW - http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/academic/class/15418-s12/www/ ▪ We have another TA! - Mike Mu (Yes, our TAs are Michael and Mike) (CMU 15-418, Spring 2012) Review 1. Why has single threaded performance topped out in recent years? 2. What prevented us from obtaining maximum speedup from the parallel programs we wrote last time? (CMU 15-418, Spring 2012) Today ▪ Today we will talk computer architecture ▪ Four key concepts about how modern computers work - Two concern execution - Two concern access to memory ▪ Knowing some architecture will help you - Understand and optimize the performance of your programs - Gain intuition about what workloads might bene!t from fast parallel machines (CMU 15-418, Spring 2012) Part 1: parallel execution (CMU 15-418, Spring 2012) Example program Compute sin(x) using tailor expansion: sin(x) = x - x3/3! + x5/5! + x7/7! + ... void sinx(int N, int terms, float* x, float* result) { for (int i=0; i<N; i++) { float value = x[i]; float numer = x[i] * x[i] * x[i]; int denom = 6; // 3! int sign = -1; for (int j=1; j<=terms; j++) { value += sign * numer / denom numer *= x[i] * x[i]; denom *= (j+3) * (j+4); sign *= -1; } result[i] = value; } } (CMU 15-418, Spring 2012) Compile program void sinx(int N, int terms, float* x, float* result) x[i] { for (int i=0; i<N; i++) { float value = x[i]; float numer = x[i] * x[i] * x[i]; int denom = 6; // 3! ld r0, addr[r1] int sign = -1; mul r1, r0, r0 mul r1, r1, r0 for (int j=1; j<=terms; j++) ..
    [Show full text]
  • Generating Multithreaded Code from Parallel Haskell for Symmetric Multiprocessors Alejandro Caro
    Generating Multithreaded Code from Parallel Haskell for Symmetric Multiprocessors by Alejandro Caro S.B., Computer Science and Engineering, MIT 1990 S.M., Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, MIT 1993 Engineer in Computer Science, MIT 1998 Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY February 1999 @ 1999 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All rights reserved. A u th or ....................... ....... ......... ................ Department 4f Electrical Engineering and Computer Science January 27, 1999 Certified by .:... .....- :...... 5.< ....... ............. V.. Arvind.I..v( Johnson Professor of Computer Science Thesis Supervisor 2' Accepted by .. .... .... .. .. .... Arthur C. Smith Chairman, Departmeital Committee on Graduate Students Generating Multithreaded Code from Parallel Haskell for Symmetric Multiprocessors by Alejandro Caro Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science on January 27, 1999, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Abstract This dissertation presents pHc, a new compiler for Parallel Haskell (pH) with complete support for the entire language. pH blends the powerful features of a high-level, higher- order language with implicitly parallel, non-strict semantics. The result is a language that is easy to use but tough to compile. The principal contribution of this work is a new code- generation algorithm that works directly on A*, a terse intermediate representation based on the A-calculus. All the power of the original language is preserved in A*, and in addition, the new representation makes it easy to express the important concept of threads, groups of expressions that can execute sequentially, at a high-level.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vector-Thread Architecture
    Appears in, The 31st Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA-31), Munich, Germany, June 2004 The Vector-Thread Architecture Ronny Krashinsky, Christopher Batten, Mark Hampton, Steve Gerding, Brian Pharris, Jared Casper, and Krste Asanovic´ MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, 32 Vassar Street, Cambridge, MA 02139 ronny,cbatten,krste @csail.mit.edu Abstract parallel code, each VP directs its own control flow by fetching its The vector-thread (VT) architectural paradigm unifies the vector own AIBs. Implementations of the VT architecture can also exploit and multithreaded compute models. The VT abstraction provides instruction-level parallelism within AIBs. the programmer with a control processor and a vector of virtual In this way, the VT architecture supports a modeless intermin- processors (VPs). The control processor can use vector-fetch com- gling of all forms of application parallelism. This flexibility pro- mands to broadcast instructions to all the VPs or each VP can use vides new ways to parallelize codes that are difficult to vectorize or thread-fetches to direct its own control flow. A seamless intermix- that incur excessive synchronization costs when threaded. Instruc- ing of the vector and threaded control mechanisms allows a VT ar- tion locality is improved by allowing common code to be factored chitecture to flexibly and compactly encode application parallelism out and executed only once on the control processor, and by execut- and locality, and a VT machine exploits these to improve perfor- ing the same AIB multiple times on each VP in turn. Data locality mance and efficiency. We present SCALE, an instantiation of the is improved as most operand communication is isolated to within VT architecture designed for low-power and high-performance em- an individual VP.
    [Show full text]