Efficient Manager-Client Pairing for Coherence Hierarchies

Manager-Client Pairing: A Framework for
Implementing Coherence Hierarchies
Jesse G. Beu
Michael C. Rosier
Thomas M. Conte
Tinker Research
Georgia Institute
of Technology
The Problem
Coherence protocols can be difficult to design properly
Integration of coherence protocols is even more difficult
Leads to monolithic, homogenous coherence in a heterogeneous
future
 
Directory MESI
The Solution
Use existing protocols as building blocks
Enable coherence integration and composition
Leads to heterogeneous hierarchies in a heterogeneous future
Design using best local protocol for the ‘common case’
 
Directory MESI
 
Broadcast
 MSI
 
Broadcast
 MSI
 
Token Rings
Width Variation Observation
Ocean_C while varying tier width at fixed 2-level
L2 Hit
Off-Chip
Manager-Client Pairing
Outline
Motivation
Introduce Manager-Client Pairing
Communication Similarity and Recursion
Types of Action
Query, Get and Grant
MCP Algorithm and Example
Impact of Tier Width and Hierarchy Height
Future Work and Conclusion
Self-Similarity for Recursion
Processor <-> Cache
Request Data
Transparently asks if we
have permission
Gets permission if not
Cache supplies Data
Cache <-> Memory
Request Data
Memory supplies Data
Add ‘asking’ feature
Internals of each layer
can be ‘black-boxed’
Types of Actions
Query – Permission Query to check permission level
Get – Request permissions and Data
Read and Write Permission, supplying Data
Permission upgrade (e.g. Shared -> Modified)
Grant – Response to earlier Get request
Manager and Client Pair
MCP Algorithm
Load
Get
Grant
Processor
Example – Realm Hit
Example – Realm Miss
Downgrade
I
I
I
I
E
M
M
Latency Impact of Hierarchies
Strong analogy with cache design
Tier width (# of clients) <-> cache sizing
Smaller Tiers result in ‘lower capacity’ with ‘faster access’
Larger Tiers have ‘higher capacity’ with ‘slower access’
Hierarchy height (# of tiers) <-> cache levels
Motivation of this work!
Single flat protocol won’t scale
Analogous to having a monolithic cache
Deeper hierarchies are not always good
Benefit of smaller, fast tiers while retaining capacity
Make too small and the lowest level will frequently miss
Additional penalty of hierarchy indirection
Consider L3/L4 Caches vs. larger L2/L3 caches
Tier Width
Hom
e
Node
Realm
Hit
Realm
Miss
Width Variation Observation
Ocean_C while varying tier width at fixed 2-level
Future Work
MCP’s role in Validation
Willing to discuss off-line
Protocol interactions/selection
Protocol and NOC topology co-design
Hierarchical topologies
Cross-vendor coherence integration
Conclusion
MCP does address concerns regarding future coherence
Uses existing protocols as building blocks
Enables coherence integration and composition
Demonstration of rapid development of a variety of hierarchy
configurations
MCP provides a generic coherence hierarchy
composition framework to support continued scaling of
diverse, massively coherent systems
Questions?
Thank you!
Slide Note
Embed
Share

Addressing the challenges in designing and integrating coherence protocols, this framework emphasizes using existing protocols as building blocks for heterogeneous hierarchies. The Manager-Client Pairing approach enables efficient communication, action types, and usage of tier width and hierarchy height for optimal performance.

  • Efficiency
  • Coherence Hierarchies
  • Communication
  • Heterogeneous Hierarchies
  • Integration

Uploaded on Sep 26, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Manager-Client Pairing: A Framework for Implementing Coherence Hierarchies Tinker Research Georgia Institute of Technology Jesse G. Beu Michael C. Rosier Thomas M. Conte

  2. The Problem Coherence protocols can be difficult to design properly Integration of coherence protocols is even more difficult Leads to monolithic, homogenous coherence in a heterogeneous future

  3. The Solution Use existing protocols as building blocks Enable coherence integration and composition Leads to heterogeneous hierarchies in a heterogeneous future Design using best local protocol for the common case

  4. Width Variation Observation L1? Miss? Latency? Histogram? 0.12? 0.1? Percent? of? Accesses? 0.08? 256? 0.06? 64x4? 16x16? Off-Chip 0.04? L2 Hit 4x64? 0.02? 0? 0? 30?60?90?120? 150? 180? 210? 240? 270? 300? 330? 360? 390? 420? 450? 480? 510? 540? 570? 600? L1? Miss? Latency? Bin? Ocean_C while varying tier width at fixed 2-level

  5. Manager-Client Pairing Coherence Domain Manager Tier 1 Client Client Client Client Coherence Realm Manager Tier 2 Client Client Client Client Coherence Realm Manager Tier 3 $ $ $ $

  6. Outline Motivation Introduce Manager-Client Pairing Communication Similarity and Recursion Types of Action Query, Get and Grant MCP Algorithm and Example Impact of Tier Width and Hierarchy Height Future Work and Conclusion

  7. Self-Similarity for Recursion Processor <-> Cache Request Data Transparently asks if we have permission Gets permission if not Cache supplies Data Cache <-> Memory Request Data Memory supplies Data Add asking feature Internals of each layer can be black-boxed Upper Upper Memory Acquire Acquire Query Query Supply Supply Manager Manager Protocol Protocol Permission Allocation Acquire Supply Clients Clients Acquire Acquire Query Query Supply Supply Lower Lower Processor

  8. Types of Actions Query Permission Query to check permission level Get Request permissions and Data Read and Write Permission, supplying Data Permission upgrade (e.g. Shared -> Modified) Grant Response to earlier Get request

  9. Manager and Client Pair Upper Manager Coherence Realm Boundary Permission Queries C o h e r e n c e D o m a i n M a n a g e r T i e r 1 Permission/ Data Acquire C l i e n t C l i e n t C l i e n t C l i e n t C o h e r e n c e R e a l m M a n a g e r Client Manager T i e r 2 Permission/ Data Supply C l i e n t C l i e n t C l i e n t C l i e n t C o h e r e n c e R e a l m M a n a g e r Downgrade Requests T i e r 3 $ $ $ $ Lower Clients Lower Clients Lower Clients Lower Clients

  10. MCP Algorithm Legend Processor 'Get' Issued to Manager-Agent Request Up a Tier Reply Down a Tier Load New Incoming Request Waiting for permission Client-Agent Permission False Get Permission Get True Manager issue Grant Permission Response to Client-Agent Has True Grant Manager? False Satisfy Processor Request

  11. Example Realm Hit Memory - Manager A E 3) ReadP Client A0 E Client A1 I Manager B M Manager C I 1) ReadP Client B0 I Client B1 M Client C0 I Processor - Processor - Processor -

  12. Example Realm Miss Memory - Manager A E 3) WriteP E Client A0 E I Client A1 I M Manager B O I ManagerC I 1) WriteP S I O I M Client B0 Client B1 Client C0 I Processor - Processor - Processor -

  13. Latency Impact of Hierarchies Strong analogy with cache design Tier width (# of clients) <-> cache sizing Smaller Tiers result in lower capacity with faster access Larger Tiers have higher capacity with slower access Hierarchy height (# of tiers) <-> cache levels Motivation of this work! Single flat protocol won t scale Analogous to having a monolithic cache Deeper hierarchies are not always good Benefit of smaller, fast tiers while retaining capacity Make too small and the lowest level will frequently miss Additional penalty of hierarchy indirection Consider L3/L4 Caches vs. larger L2/L3 caches

  14. Tier Width

  15. Width Variation Observation L1? Miss? Latency? Histogram? 0.12? 0.1? Percent? of? Accesses? 0.08? 256? 0.06? 64x4? 16x16? 0.04? 4x64? 0.02? 0? 0? 30?60?90?120? 150? 180? 210? 240? 270? 300? 330? 360? 390? 420? 450? 480? 510? 540? 570? 600? L1? Miss? Latency? Bin? Ocean_C while varying tier width at fixed 2-level

  16. Future Work MCP s role in Validation Willing to discuss off-line Protocol interactions/selection Protocol and NOC topology co-design Hierarchical topologies Cross-vendor coherence integration

  17. Conclusion MCP does address concerns regarding future coherence Uses existing protocols as building blocks Enables coherence integration and composition Demonstration of rapid development of a variety of hierarchy configurations MCP provides a generic coherence hierarchy composition framework to support continued scaling of diverse, massively coherent systems

  18. Questions? Thank you!

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#