1 / 37

Hardware Transactional Memory (Herlihy, Moss, 1993)

Hardware Transactional Memory (Herlihy, Moss, 1993). Some slides are taken from a presentation by Royi Maimon & Merav Havuv, prepared for a seminar given by Prof. Yehuda Afek. Outline. Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) Transactions Caches and coherence protocols General Implementation

estellat
Télécharger la présentation

Hardware Transactional Memory (Herlihy, Moss, 1993)

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. Hardware Transactional Memory(Herlihy, Moss, 1993) Some slides are taken from a presentation by Royi Maimon & Merav Havuv, prepared for a seminar given by Prof. Yehuda Afek.

  2. Outline • Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) • Transactions • Caches and coherence protocols • General Implementation • Simulation

  3. What is a transaction? • A transaction is a sequence of memory loads and stores executed by a single process that either commits or aborts • If a transaction commits, all the loads and stores appear to have executed atomically • If a transaction aborts, none of its stores take effect • Transaction operations aren't visible until they commit (if they do)

  4. Transactions properties: A transaction satisfies the following property: • Atomicity: Each transaction either commits (its changes seem to take effect atomically) or aborts (its changes have no effect).

  5. Transactional Memory • A new multiprocessor architecture • The goal: Implementing non-blocking synchronization that is • efficient • easy to use compared with conventional techniques based on mutual exclusion • Implemented by straightforward extensions to multiprocessor cache-coherence protocols and / orby software mechanisms

  6. Outline • Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) • Transactions • Caches and coherence protocols • General Implementation • Simulation 6

  7. A cache is an associative (a.k.a. content-addressable) memory Address A Data @A Conventional memory Address A, s.t. *A=D Data D Associative memory

  8. Cache Associativity

  9. Fully associative cache

  10. Cache tags and address structure Main Memory Cache Tags are typically high-order address bits

  11. In multiprocessors, each processor typically has its own local cache memory Minimize average latency due to memory access Decrease bus traffic Maximize cache hit ratio A Cache-coherence protocol manages the consistency of caches and main memory: Shared memory semantics maintained Caches and main memory communicate to guarantee coherency Cache-Coherence Protocol

  12. The need to maintain coherency Figure taken from the book: “Computer architecture – A quantitative approach” by Hennessy and Peterson

  13. Coherency requirements Text taken from the book: “Computer architecture – A quantitative approach” by Hennessy and Peterson

  14. All caches monitor (snoop) the activity on a global bus/interconnect to determine if they have a copy of the block of data that is requested on the bus. Snoopy Cache

  15. Coherence protocol types • Write through: the information is written to both the cache block and to the block in the lower-level memory • Write-back (widely used): the information is written only to the cache block. The modified cache block is written to main memory only when it is replaced

  16. 3-state Coherence protocol • Invalid: cache line/block does not contain legal information • Shared: cache line/block contains information that may be shared by other caches • Modified/exclusive: cache line/block was modified while in cache and is exclusively owned by current cache

  17. Cache-coherency mechanism (write-back)

  18. Cache-coherency mechanism – state transition diagram Figure taken from the book: “Computer architecture – A quantitative approach” by Hennessy and Peterson

  19. MESI protocol (Goodman, 1983)

  20. Outline • Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) • Transactions • Caches and coherence protocols • General Implementation • Simulation

  21. HTM-supported API The following primitive instructions for accessing memory are provided: • Load-transactional (LT): reads value of a shared memory location into a private register. • Load-transactional-exclusive (LTX): Like LT, but “hinting” that the location is likely to be modified. • Store-transactional (ST) tentatively writes a value from a private register to a shared memory location. • Commit (COMMIT) • Abort (ABORT) • Validate (VALIDATE) tests the current transaction status.

  22. Some definitions • Read set:the set of locations read by LT by a transaction • Write set:the set of locations accessed by LTX or ST issued by a transaction • Data set(footprint):the union of the read and write sets. • A set of values in memory is inconsistentif it couldn’t have been produced by any serial execution of transactions

  23. Intended Use Instead of acquiring a lock, executing the critical section, and releasing the lock, a process would: • use LT or LTX to read from a set of locations • use VALIDATE to check that the values read are consistent, • use ST to modify a set of locations • use COMMIT to make the changes permanent. If either the VALIDATE or the COMMIT fails, the process returns to Step (1).

  24. Implementation • Hardware transactional memory is implemented by modifyingstandard multiprocessor cache coherence protocols • Herlihy and Moss suggested to extend “snoopy” cache protocol for a shared bus to support transactional memory • Supports short-lived transactions with a relatively small data set.

  25. The basic idea • Any protocol capable of detecting register access conflicts can also detect transaction conflict at no extra cost • Once a transaction conflict is detected, it can be resolved in a variety of ways

  26. Implementation • Each processor maintains two caches • Regular cachefor non-transactional operations, • Transactional cachesmall, fully associative cache for transactional operations.It holds all the tentative writes, without propagating them to other processors or to main memory (until commit) • An entry may reside in one cache or the other but not in both

  27. Cache line states • Each cache line (regular or transactional) has one of the following states: (Modified) (Exclusive) • Each transactional cache lines has (in addition) one of these states: “New” values “Old” values

  28. Cleanup • When the transactional cache needs space for a new entry, it searches for: • A TC_INVALID entry • If none - a TC_NORMAL entry • finally for an TC_COMMIT entry (why can such entries be replaced?)

  29. Each processor maintains two flags: The transaction active (TACTIVE) flag: indicates whether a transaction is in progress The transaction status (TSTATUS) flag: indicates whether that transaction is active (True) or aborted (False) Non-transactional operations behave exactly as in original cache-coherence protocol Processor actions

  30. Look for tc_ABORT entry Return its value Look for NORMAL entry Change it to tc_ABORT and allocate another tc_COMMIT entry with same value Ask to read this block from the shared memory • Abort the transaction: • TSTATUS=FALSE • Drop tc_ABORT entries • All tc_COMMIT entries are set to tc_NORMAL Create two entries: tc_ABORT and tc_COMMIT Example – LT operation: Not Found? Found? Cache miss Not Found? Found? Successful read Busy signal

  31. Snoopy cache actions: • Both the regular cache and the transactional cache snoop on the bus. • A cache ignores any bus cycles for lines not in that cache. • The transactional cache’s behavior: • If TSTATUS=False, or if the operation isn’t transactional, the cache acts just like the regular cache, but ignores entries with state other than TC_NORMAL • Otherwise: On LT of another cpu, if the state is TC_NORMAL or the line not written to, the cache returns the value, and in all other cases it returns BUSY

  32. Committing/aborting a transaction • Upon commit • Set all entries tagged by TC_COMMIT to TC_INVALID • Set all entries tagged by TC_ABORT to TC_NORMAL • Upon abort • Set all entries tagged by TC_ABORT to TC_INVALID • Set all entries tagged by TC_COMMIT to TC_NORMAL Since transactional cache is small, it is assumed that these operations can be done in parallel.

  33. Outline • Lock-Free • Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) • Transactions • Caches and coherence protocols • General Implementation • Simulation

  34. Simulation • We’ll see an example code for the producer/consumer algorithm using transactional memory architecture. • The simulation runs on both cache coherence protocols: snoopy and directory cache. • The simulation use 32 processors • The simulation finishes when 2^16 operations have completed.

  35. Part Of Producer/Consumer Code unsigned queue_deq(queue *q) { unsigned head, tail, result; unsigned backoff = BACKOFF_MIN unsigned wait; while (1) { result = QUEUE_EMPTY; tail = LTX(&q->enqs); head = LTX(&q->deqs); if (head != tail) { /* queue not empty? */ result = LT(&q->items[head % QUEUE_SIZE]); /* advance counter */ ST(&q->deqs, head + 1); } if (COMMIT()) break; /* abort => backoff */ wait = random() % (01 << backoff); while (wait--); if (backoff < BACKOFF_MAX) backoff++; } return result; } typedef struct { Word deqs; // Holds the head’s index Word enqs; // Holds the tail’s index Word items[QUEUE_SIZE]; } queue;

  36. The results: Snoopy cache Directory-based coherency

  37. Key Limitations: • Transactional size is limited by cache size • Transaction length effectively limited by scheduling quantum • Process migration problematic

More Related