A Greedy Heuristic Approximation Scheduling Algorithm for 3D Multicore Processors

  • Thomas Canhao Xu
  • Pasi Liljeberg
  • Hannu Tenhunen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7155)

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a greedy heuristic approximation scheduling algorithm for future multicore processors. It is expected that hundreds of cores will be integrated on a single chip, known as a Chip Multiprocessor (CMP). To reduce on-chip communication delay, 3D integration with Through Silicon Vias (TSVs) is introduced to replace the 2D counterpart. Multiple functional layers can be stacked in a 3D CMP. However, operating system process scheduling, one of the most important design issues for CMP systems, has not been well addressed for such a system. We define a model for future 3D CMPs, based on which a scheduling algorithm is proposed to reduce cache access latencies and the delay of inter process communications (IPC). We explore different scheduling possibilities and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of our algorithm. We present benchmark results using a cycle accurate full system simulator based on realistic workloads. Experiments show that under two workloads, the execution times of our scheduling in two configurations (2 and 4 threads) are reduced by 15.58% and 8.13% respectively, compared with the other schedulings. Our study provides a guideline for designing scheduling algorithms for 3D multicore processors.

Keywords

Schedule Algorithm Multicore Processor Core Allocation Inter Process Communication Shared Cache 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Dally, W.J., Towles, B.: Route packets, not wires: on-chip inteconnection networks. In: Proceedings of the 38th Conference on Design Automation, pp. 684–689 (June 2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Intel: Intel research areas on microarchitecture (May 2011), http://techresearch.intel.com/projecthome.aspx?ResearchAreaId=11
  3. 3.
    Sylvester, D., Keutzer, K.: Getting to the bottom of deep submicron. In: ICCAD 1998, pp. 203–211 (November 1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Velenis, D., Stucchi, M., Marinissen, E., Swinnen, B., Beyne, E.: Impact of 3d design choices on manufacturing cost. In: IEEE 3DIC 2009, pp. 1–5 (September 2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Xu, T.C., Liljeberg, P., Tenhunen, H.: Optimal number and placement of through silicon vias in 3d network-on-chip. In: Proc. of the 14th DDECS. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leutenegger, S.T., Vernon, M.K.: The performance of multiprogrammed multiprocessor scheduling algorithms. In: Proc. of the SIGMETRICS, pp. 226–236 (April 1990)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, C., Lee, C., Hou, E.: Efficient scheduling algorithms for robot inverse dynamics computation on a multiprocessor system. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 18(5), 729–743 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hakem, M., Butelle, F.: Dynamic critical path scheduling parallel programs onto multiprocessors. In: Proceedings of 19th IEEE IPDPS, p. 203b (April 2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sharma, D.D., Pradhan, D.K.: Processor allocation in hypercube multicomputers: Fast and efficient strategies for cubic and noncubic allocation. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 6(10), 1108–1123 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Laudon, J., Lenoski, D.: The sgi origin: a ccnuma highly scalable server. In: Proc. of the 24th International Symposium on Computer Architecture, pp. 241–251 (June 1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen, Y.J., Yang, C.L., Chang, Y.S.: An architectural co-synthesis algorithm for energy-aware network-on-chip design. J. Syst. Archit. 55(5-6), 299–309 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu, J., Marculescu, R.: Energy-aware communication and task scheduling for network-on-chip architectures under real-time constraints. In: DATE 2004, p. 10234. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    IBM: Ibm power 7 processor. In: Hot Chips 2009 (August 2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shyamkumar, T., Naveen, M., Ho, A.J., Jouppi Norman, P.: Cacti 5.1. Technical Report HPL-2008-20, HP Labs (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Semiconductor Industry Association: The international technology roadmap for semiconductors (itrs) (2007), http://www.itrs.net/Links/2007ITRS/Home2007.htm
  16. 16.
    Lau, J.H.: Tsv manufacturing yield and hidden costs for 3d ic integration. In: Proc. of the 60th ECTC, pp. 1031 –1042 (June 2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lei, T., Kumar, S.: A two-step genetic algorithm for mapping task graphs to a network on chip architecture. In: DSD, pp. 180–187 (September 2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Magnusson, P., Christensson, M., Eskilson, J., Forsgren, D., Hallberg, G., Hogberg, J., Larsson, F., Moestedt, A., Werner, B.: Simics: A full system simulation platform. Computer 35(2), 50–58 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bailey, D.H.: Ffts in external or hierarchical memory. The Journal of Supercomputing 4, 23–35 (1990), doi:10.1007/BF00162341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Blelloch, G.E., Leiserson, C.E., Maggs, B.M., Plaxton, C.G., Smith, S.J., Zagha, M.: A comparison of sorting algorithms for the connection machine cm-2. In: Proceedings of the 3rd SPAA, pp. 3–16. ACM, New York (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Canhao Xu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Pasi Liljeberg
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hannu Tenhunen
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Turku Center for Computer ScienceTurkuFinland
  2. 2.Department of Information TechnologyUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations