1 / 32

Local Unidirectional Bias for Smooth Cutsize-delay Tradeoff in Performance-driven Partitioning

Local Unidirectional Bias for Smooth Cutsize-delay Tradeoff in Performance-driven Partitioning. Andrew B. Kahng and Xu Xu UCSD CSE and ECE Depts. . Work supported in part by MARCO GSRC. Outline.  Motivation Performance driven bipartition problem New bipartitioning algorithm

bracha
Download Presentation

Local Unidirectional Bias for Smooth Cutsize-delay Tradeoff in Performance-driven Partitioning

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. Local Unidirectional Bias for Smooth Cutsize-delay Tradeoff in Performance-driven Partitioning Andrew B. Kahng and Xu Xu UCSD CSE and ECE Depts. Work supported in part by MARCO GSRC

  2. Outline  Motivation • Performance driven bipartition problem • New bipartitioning algorithm • Experimental results • Conclusion and future work

  3. Partitioning and Performance The hypergraph partitioning problem is to divide the nodes of a hypergraph into roughly equal parts; the traditional objective is to minimize cutsize. In performance-driven partitioning, we also seek to minimize path delay on timing paths.

  4. Previous Work (I) • [Cong et al. ISPD-2002] • Global clustering based algorithm with retiming Min-delay Clustering w/ retiming Min-cutsize Clustering De-clustering and refinement • Reduces delay by 16% while increasing cutsize by 17% • Requires substantial gate replication

  5. Previous Work (II) • [Ababei et al. ICCAD-2002] • Reweighting based method Path based Input Reweighting Cutsize oriented partitioner, such as hMetis,MLPart 1 1 Global timing analysis Find critical paths 1 Net based 1 2 1 • 14% reduction of delay with 10% increase in cutsize • 139% increase in runtime compared with hMetis

  6. Motivating Questions  Can we avoid global timing analysis? • Global timing analysis is extremely time-consuming • Can we improve path delay without significant degrading of cutsize? • Need smooth tradeoff between delay and cutsize • Can we reduce implementation overheads? • Previous methods store thousands of critical paths and continuously update them

  7. Outline • Motivation Performance driven bipartition problem • New bipartitioning algorithm • Experimental results • Conclusion and future work

  8. Delay Model Delay = hop_delay + node_delay hop Part 1 Part 0 FF nodes Combinational nodes cut [Cong et al. ISPD-2002] hop_delay=5 node_delay=1  Delay = 3x5 + 5x1 = 20 [Ababei et al. ICCAD-2002] hop_delay=Elmore delay node_delay=constant

  9. Performance Driven Bipartition Problem • Given: • Hypergraph H=(V,E) • Area Balance tolerance s (0<s<1), a parameter to control allowable slack in the area constraint • a, a given parameter which captures tradeoff between cutsize and path delay (hopcount) • Find: • A bipartition (V0|V1) which satisfies: • and minimizes a(cutsize)+(1-a)(Max_hopcount)

  10. Outline • Motivation • Performance driven bipartition problem  New bipartitioning algorithm • Experimental results • Conclusion and future work

  11. Unidirectional Partition Path delay is minimized with hopcount = 1 if the partition is unidirectional (“acyclic”), that is, all cuts are in the same direction Part 1 Part 0 Part 0 Problem: • High cutsize • No unidirectional solution Can we achieve “locally unidirectional” partition? Max hopcount=5 Max hopcount=3 Part 0 Part 0 Part 1 Part 1

  12. V-Shaped Nodes V-shaped node If a combinational node vsatisfies: there exist vj, vt in the other part and a path from vj to vt that includes only v thenv is a V-shaped node vj vt Part 0 Part 1 v

  13. V-Shaped Nodes in Critical Paths Empirical observations from study of partitioning solutions: • there are V-shaped nodes in the partitioning solutions • every V-shaped node is included in many critical paths • every critical path contains several V-shaped nodes For testcase 1: • Number of nets : 16377 • Number of critical paths : 26772 • On average, one critical path contains 27.6 nodes • On average, one critical path contains 3.4 V-nodes • On average, one V-node belongs to 233.7critical paths

  14. Key Idea: V-Shaped Nodes Elimination Part 0 f Part 0 f c a c a Move b b Part 1 b d e d e Part 1 Move V-shaped node “b” to reduce path hopcount PATH: abc hopcount=0 PATH: dbc hopcount=1 PATH: ebc hopcount=1 PATH: abc hopcount=2 PATH: dbc hopcount=1 PATH: ebc hopcount=1

  15. Distance-k V-Shaped Nodes Elimination Part 0 Part 0 d a d a b c Move b,c Part 1 b c Part 1 k = 2: Move V2 node “b, c” reduce path hopcount from 2 to 0 Problems with large k: Cutsize may be greatly increased Delay of one path reduced while other paths delay increased

  16. New Gain Function v v After Move Before Move Gain(v)=δ(0)+ δ(1) g(v): traditional FM gain rj(v): reduction of Vj nodes after moving v

  17. Distance-k Unidirectional Algorithm Calculate initial gains for all nodes and store the gains Select the node v with maximum gain /* CLIP-like method: move the cluster that v belongs to */ Reset the gains of all nodes to zero Move v and update the gains of v and its neighbors While ( one node not moved) Select one node v with the maximum updated gain Move v and update the related gains Find the point in the move sequence at which the sum of gains is maximum; undo all moves after this point

  18. Outline • Motivation • New bipartitioning algorithm • Experimental results • Conclusion and future work

  19. Experimental Setup • Four industry testcases obtained as LEF/DEF • Model of Ababei et al. (ICCAD-2002) used to calculate delay • Partitioning solutions compared to results of MLPart • strongest multilevel netlist partitioning code • website: http://nexus6.cs.ucla.edu/GSRC/bookshelf/Slots/Partitioning/MLPart • All tests on 600MHz Intel Pentium-III Xeon

  20. Biasing against V1 Nodes vs. MLPart δ(0)=1, δ(1)=10 • Reduction of delay: 4.5%-24.4%average:15.1% • Increase of cutsize:3.0%-10.0%average:4.9% • Increase of runtime:6.3%-11.4%average: 9.7% Using the delay model in Cong et al. ISPD -2002 • Reduction of delay: 4.3%-21.2%average:14.7%

  21. Biasing against V2 Nodes vs. MLPart δ(0)=1, δ(1)=30, δ(2)=3 • Reduction of delay: 8.9%-30.0%average: 18.7% • Increase of cutsize:3.1%-7.2%average: 3.5% • Increase of runtime:11.9%-15.9%average: 13.1% Using the delay model in Cong et al. ISPD -2002 • Reduction of delay: 8.3%-28.7%average: 17.3%

  22. Outline • Motivation • Performance driven bipartition problem • New bipartitioning algorithm • Experimental results  Conclusions and future work

  23. Conclusions • Simple yet efficient timing-driven partitioning that does not require global timing analysis • Negligible implementation, runtime overhead • Significantly reduces path delay with cutsize and runtime almost same as leading-edge MLPart • Similar improvements observed with different path delay metrics • Futures • Impact of new partitioner on placement • Efficient methods for biasing δ(k) k>2

  24. Thank you!

  25. Future Work • Impact of new partitioner on placement • Efficient methods for biasing δ(k) k>2

  26. Why Performance Driven Partitioning? • Achieving timing closure becomes increasingly difficult in deep-submicron technologies due to non-ideal scaling of interconnect delay • Routing alone can no longer solve timing problem, even with aggressive optimizations (buffer insertion, buffer/wire sizing,…) Timing needs to be addressed at all design stages • Partitioning is a critical step in defining interconnect timing properties, but is traditionally driven by cutsize objective

  27. Previous Work (I) • With Logic Replication • Retiming • Replication graph • Without Logic Replication • Net based reweighting • Path based reweighting

  28. Part 0 Part 1 FM Partitioning and Gain Function Start with random partition v v Move the node with the max gain and lock it Part 0 After Move Before Move Part 1 Gain(v)=-1 Gain(v) = Reduction of cutsize after moving v Keep moving until all nodes are locked Find the best point in the move sequence Part 1 Part 0 Part 0 Part 1

  29. Procedure to Calculate rj(v) Delete all FF nodes and their related edges In the remaining graph, BFS from v Foreach level j from 1 to k If v is a Vj node before moving, rj’=1 If v is a Vj node after moving, rj’’=1 rj=rj’’-rj’

  30. v CLIP v CLIP Algorithm Reminiscent of CLIP (Deng et al. DAC 1996) in how it induces movement of clusters across the cutline.

  31. Distance-k V-Shaped Nodes Distance-k V-shaped nodes (Vk-node): If k combinational nodes vi,1 … vi,k satisfy: vi,1 … vi,k are in the same part  vj, vt in the other part  a path from vj to vt and only passes vi,1 … vi,k thenvi,1 … vi,k are distance-k V-shaped nodes vj vt Part 0 Part 1 vi,1 vi,k

  32. Notation • H(V,E)= circuit hypergraph • V = set of nodes representing components of the circuit • E = set of signal nets • A bipartition (V0|V1) of H(V,E) divides V into two disjoint subsets s.t. V= V0V1, which are called Part 0 and Part 1 • A= the total area of all the nodes in V • A0= the area of all the nodes in V0

More Related