TY - JOUR
T1 - The Performance Impact of Flexibility in the Stanford Flash Multiprocessor
AU - Heinrich, Mark
AU - Kuskin, Jeffrey
AU - Ofelt, David
AU - Heinlein, John
AU - Baxter, Joel
AU - Singh, Jaswinder Pal
AU - Simoni, Richard
AU - Gharachorloo, Kourosh
AU - Nakahira, David
AU - Horowitz, Mark
AU - Gupta, Anoop
AU - Rosenblum, Mendel
AU - Hennessy, John
PY - 1994/1/11
Y1 - 1994/1/11
N2 - A flexible communication mechanism is a desirable feature in multiprocessors because it allows support for multiple communication protocols, expands performance monitoring capabilities, and leads to a simpler design and debug process. In the Stanford FLASH multiprocessor, flexibility is obtained by requiring all transactions in a node to pass through a programmable node controller, called MAGIC. In this paper, we evaluate the performance costs of flexibility by comparing the performance of FLASH to that of an idealized hardwired machine on representative parallel applications and a multiprogramming workload. To measure the performance of FLASH, we use a detailed simulator of the FLASH and MAGIC designs, together with the code sequences that implement the cache-coherence protocol. We find that for a range of optimized parallel applications the performance differences between the idealized machine and FLASH are small. For these programs, either the miss rates are small or the latency of the programmable protocol can be hidden behind the memory access time. For applications that incur a large number of remote misses or exhibit substantial hot-spotting, performance is poor for both machines, though the increased remote access latencies or the occupancy of MAGIC lead to lower performance for the flexible design. In most cases, however, FLASH is only 2%–12% slower than the idealized machine.
AB - A flexible communication mechanism is a desirable feature in multiprocessors because it allows support for multiple communication protocols, expands performance monitoring capabilities, and leads to a simpler design and debug process. In the Stanford FLASH multiprocessor, flexibility is obtained by requiring all transactions in a node to pass through a programmable node controller, called MAGIC. In this paper, we evaluate the performance costs of flexibility by comparing the performance of FLASH to that of an idealized hardwired machine on representative parallel applications and a multiprogramming workload. To measure the performance of FLASH, we use a detailed simulator of the FLASH and MAGIC designs, together with the code sequences that implement the cache-coherence protocol. We find that for a range of optimized parallel applications the performance differences between the idealized machine and FLASH are small. For these programs, either the miss rates are small or the latency of the programmable protocol can be hidden behind the memory access time. For applications that incur a large number of remote misses or exhibit substantial hot-spotting, performance is poor for both machines, though the increased remote access latencies or the occupancy of MAGIC lead to lower performance for the flexible design. In most cases, however, FLASH is only 2%–12% slower than the idealized machine.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84976707130&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84976707130&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1145/195470.195569
DO - 10.1145/195470.195569
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84976707130
SN - 0362-1340
VL - 29
SP - 274
EP - 285
JO - SIGPLAN Notices (ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages)
JF - SIGPLAN Notices (ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages)
IS - 11
ER -