1 / 22

BulkCommit : Scalable and Fast Commit of Atomic Blocks in a Lazy Multiprocessor Environment

BulkCommit : Scalable and Fast Commit of Atomic Blocks in a Lazy Multiprocessor Environment. Author: Xuehai Qian , Benjami Sahelices , Depei Qian. DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KARNATAKA-SURATHKAL 2014. Presented by:

tuwa
Télécharger la présentation

BulkCommit : Scalable and Fast Commit of Atomic Blocks in a Lazy Multiprocessor Environment

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

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BulkCommit: Scalable and Fast Commit of Atomic Blocks in a Lazy Multiprocessor Environment Author: XuehaiQian, BenjamiSahelices, DepeiQian • DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING • NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY • KARNATAKA-SURATHKAL • 2014 Presented by: PravinRamteke (CS13F08)Sawan Belekar(13IS04F) Course Instructor: Dr. BasavarajTalawar

  2. Motivation •ArchitecturesthatcontinuouslyexecuteAtomicBlocksorChunks(e.g.,TCC,BulkSC) • Chunk:agroupofdynamicallycontiguousinstructionsexecutedatomically • Providingperformanceandprogrammabilityadvantages[Hammond04][Ahn09] •Chunkcommitisanimportantoperation:makingthestateofachunkvisible atomically •Wefocusonthedesignswithlazydetectionofconflicts • Provideshigherconcurrencyincodeswithhighconflicts • Parallelizingthecommitischallenging •Requirestheconsistentconflictresolutiondecisionoverallthedistributed directorymodules • Therefore,mostcurrentschemeshavesomesequentialstepsinthecommit •Inaddition,thecurrentlazyconflictresolutionsaresub-optimal • IncurthesquashwhenthereisonlyWrite-After-Write(WAW)conflict 2

  3. Lifetime of aChunk Time Grouping Propagation Execution Commit • Execution: • Readsandwritesbringlinesintothecache • Nowrittenlineismadevisibletootherprocessors • Executionendswhenthelastinstructionofthechunkcompletes • Commit:makethechunkstatevisibleatomically • Grouping:settherelativeorderofanytwoconflictingchunks • Grabbingthedirectory:lockingthelocalmemorylinesanddetectingtheconflicts • Afteracommitgrabsalltherelevantdirectories,itisguaranteedtocommitsuccessfully • Propagation:makingthestoresinachunkvisibletotherestofthesystem • Involvingsendinginvalidationsandupdatingdirectorystates • Atomicityisensuredsincetherelevantcachelinesarelogicallylockedbysignaturesduringtheprocess 3

  4. Inefficiency:SquashonWAW-Only Time Grouping Propagation C0 C1 P0 P1 store buffer wr x wr x ?? C1 Squashed/ x: D in P0 Dir wr x Serialize WAW-only conflictwith squash wr x wr x Execution Commit Chunks wr x wr x wr x x:S x:I x:I x:D x:D x:I x:S L1 cache Re-exec x: S in P0&P1 x: D in P1 m Serialize WAW Conventional System without re-execution Chunk-based System 5

  5. Contribution:BulkCommit •BulkCommit:commitprotocolwithparallelgroupingandsquash-free serializationofWAW-onlyconflict • IntelliSquash: nosquash onWAW • Insight:using L1 cacheasthe“storebuffer”forthechunk • IntelliCommit: parallelgroupingwithoutbroadcast • Insight:using preemptionmechanism toensuretheconsistentorder oftwoconflictingchunks •BulkCommittriestoachievetheoptimalcommitprotocoldesign 6

  6. Outline •Motivation •IntelliSquash •IntelliCommit •Evaluation 7

  7. IntelliSquash:Insight •Challenge:thespeculativedataproducedbyachunkcannotbelostwhenthechunkisreadyto commit • Solution:usetheL1cacheasthe“storebuffer”forachunk • Similartothestorebufferintheconventionalsystem • Onreceivinganinvalidation,thespeculativedirtywordsofalinearepreserved • Absentbit:itissetwhen • Thelineisnotpresented • Thelinecontainssomespeculativewords • Per-worddirtybit(notshown) P0 P0 P1 P1 000 1 111 v 011 v v 0 011 v v Dir State m: D in P1 Dir State m: D in P1 line(m) line(m) 1 1 1 v v 0 1 1 1 commit commit spV d spV A d 1 1 1 v v 1 1 1 v v spV d spV A d m: S in P0&P1 m: S in P0&P1 8

  8. IntelliSquash:MergeOperation •Performed when thewholelinewith The dirty word is merged with •Mergetheremotenon-speculative cachelinewiththelocalspeculative P0 read 0 111 v’ • Oncommit AspVd • Thelineis notaccesses again AspVd • Therefore,needtobringtheline Dir State m: S in P1&P1 tothecacheasifthereis amiss • Unset Absent(A)bit Absentbitsetis brought tothecache the non-speculative line words line(m) • On misses to a word not presented v 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 v v v v m: S in P0&P1 m: D in P1 9

  9. Outline •Motivation •IntelliSquash •IntelliCommit •Evaluation 10

  10. IntelliCommit Protocol •Onchunkcommit: • Processorsends commitrequests P toalltherelevantdirectorymodules request: • Locksthememorylines D0 D1 D2 D3 • Responds withcommit_ack • Processorcountsthenumberof commit_ackreceived Group formed • Processorsends commit_confirm when itreceivestheexpected numberofcommit_ack • Directory module receives commit 11

  11. ConflictingChunksTryingtoCommit • Different overlapped directory modules receive commit request in opposite order • Need to avoid deadlock P3 D3 P0 D0 C3 C0 P1 D1 P2 D2 12

  12. IntelliCommit:DeadlockResolution •Basicidea:enforceaconsistentorderbetweentwoconflictingchunks •Piggybackahardware-generatedrandomnumberwiththecommitrequest 13

  13. IntelliCommit:DeadlockResolution (cont..)

  14. WhyDoes IntelliCommit Work? 1. Whenthedirectorygroupofachunkis alreadyformed,thechunk cannotbepreemptedbyanother chunk 2. Allthemodulesinvolved in aconflictreachthesamedecisionon whichchunkhasthehigherpriority,locally 14

  15. IntelliCommit Implementation • Extramessages(P=Processor,D=Directory): • preempt_request(D→P) • preempt_ack(P→D) • preempt_nack(P→D) • preempt_finish(D→P) • CommitAckCounter(CAC):#(notreceivedcommit_ack) • PreemptionVector(PV)(N=#P=#D): • Eachprocessor:Ncountersofsizelog(N) • PV[i]atPj=k • Pj’schunkis preemptedbyPi’schunkin kdirectories • IncreasePV[i]:abouttosendpreempt_ackforPi’schunk • DecreasePV[i]:receivedapreempt_finishforPi’schunk • Whentosendcommit_confirm? • (CAC==0)&&(foreachi,PV[i]==0) •Receivedallcommit_ackandthechunkisnotpreemptedbyanyotherchunksin anydirectory

  16. Outline •Motivation •IntelliSquash •IntelliCommit •Evaluation 16

  17. Evaluation •CycleaccurateNOCsimulationwithprocessorandcachemodel •Numberofcores:16and64 •11SPLASH-2and7PARSECapplications •Oneortwooutstandingchunks •Implementedmostdistributedcommitprotocols: • ScalableTCC(ST) • ScalableBulk(SB) • BulkCommitwithoutIntelliSquash(BC-SQ) • BulkCommit(BC) 17

  18. SPLASH-2 Performance •BulkCommitreducesbothsquash andcommittime 18

  19. PARSECPerformance 19

  20. One and TwoOutstandingChunks •Using twooutstandingchunksisnotalwaysusefuldue tothesetrestriction • Twochunksfromthesameprocessorcannotwritethesamecacheset

  21. Conclusion •ProposedBulkCommit:commitprotocolwithparallelgroupingand squash-freeserializationofWAW-onlyconflict •Keyproperties: • SerializingWAWbetweenchunkswithoutsquashing • Exploitingthesimilarityofachunkcommitandanindividualstore • Parallelgrouping • Usingpreemptionmechanismstoordertwoconflictingchunks consistently •Results: • Eliminatethecommitbottleneckwithevensingleoutstandingchunk • Reducethesquashtimeforsomeapplication

More Related