550 likes | 720 Views
Advanced Computer Architecture 5MD00 / 5Z033 ILP architectures. Henk Corporaal www.ics.ele.tue.nl/~heco/courses/aca h.corporaal@tue.nl TUEindhoven 2007. Topics. Introduction Hazards Data dependences Control dependences Branch prediction Dependences limit ILP: scheduling
E N D
Advanced Computer Architecture5MD00 / 5Z033ILP architectures Henk Corporaal www.ics.ele.tue.nl/~heco/courses/aca h.corporaal@tue.nl TUEindhoven 2007
Topics • Introduction • Hazards • Data dependences • Control dependences • Branch prediction • Dependences limit ILP: scheduling • Out-Of-Order execution: Hardware speculation • Multiple issue • How much ILP is there? ACA H.Corporaal
Introduction ILP = Instruction level parallelism • multiple operations (or instructions) can be executed in parallel Needed: • Sufficient resources • Parallel scheduling • Hardware solution • Software solution • Application should contain ILP ACA H.Corporaal
Hazards • Three types of hazards • Structural • Data dependence • Control dependence • Hazards cause scheduling problems ACA H.Corporaal
Data dependences • RaW read after write • WaR write after read • WaW write after write ACA H.Corporaal
Control Dependences C input code: if (a > b) { r = a % b; } else { r = b % a; } y = a*b; 1 sub t1, a, b bgz t1, 2, 3 CFG: 2 rem r, a, b goto 4 3 rem r, b, a goto 4 4 mul y,a,b ………….. How real are control dependences? ACA H.Corporaal
Branch Prediction ACA H.Corporaal
Branch PredictionMotivation • High branch penalties in pipelined processors: • With on average one out of five instructions being a branch, the maximum ILP is five • Situation even worse for multiple-issue processors, because we need to provide an instruction stream of n instructions per cycle. • Idea: predict the outcome of branches based on their history and execute instructions speculatively ACA H.Corporaal
5 Branch Prediction Schemes • 1-bit Branch Prediction Buffer • 2-bit Branch Prediction Buffer • Correlating Branch Prediction Buffer • Branch Target Buffer • Return Address Predictors + A way to get rid of those malicious branches ACA H.Corporaal
1-bit Branch Prediction Buffer • 1-bit branch prediction buffer or branch history table: • Buffer is like a cache without tags • Does not help for simple MIPS pipeline because target address calculations in same stage as branch condition calculation PC 10…..10 101 00 BHT 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ACA H.Corporaal
Branch Prediction Buffer: 1 bit prediction Branch address 2 K entries (K bits) predictionbit • Problems: • Aliasing: lower K bits of different branch instructions could be the same • Soln: Use tags (the buffer becomes a tag); however very expensive • Loops are predicted wrong twice • Soln: Use n-bit saturation counter prediction • taken if counter 2 (n-1) • not-taken if counter < 2 (n-1) • A 2 bit saturating counter predicts a loop wrong only once ACA H.Corporaal
T NT Predict Taken Predict Taken T T NT NT Predict Not Taken Predict Not Taken T NT 2-bit Branch Prediction Buffer • Solution: 2-bit scheme where prediction is changed only if mispredicted twice • Can be implemented as a saturating counter: ACA H.Corporaal
Correlating Branches • Fragment from SPEC92 benchmark eqntott: if (aa==2) aa = 0; if (bb==2) bb=0; if (aa!=bb){..} subi R3,R1,#2 b1: bnez R3,L1 add R1,R0,R0 L1: subi R3,R2,#2 b2: bnez R3,L2 add R2,R0,R0 L2: sub R3,R1,R2 b3: beqz R3,L3 ACA H.Corporaal
Correlating Branch Predictor Idea: behavior of current branch is related to taken/not taken history of recently executed branches • Then behavior of recent branches selects between, say, 4 predictions of next branch, updating just that prediction • (2,2) predictor: 2-bit global, 2-bit local • (k,n) predictor uses behavior of last k branches to choose from 2k predictors, each of which is n-bit predictor • 4 bits from branch address 2-bits per branch local predictors Prediction shift register 2-bit global branch history (01 = not taken, then taken) ACA H.Corporaal
Branch Correlation Using Branch History • Two schemes (a, k, m, n) • PA: Per address history, a > 0 • GA: Global history, a = 0 Pattern History Table 2m-1 n-bit saturating Up/Down Counter m 1 Prediction Branch Address 0 0 1 2k-1 k a Branch History Table Table size (usually n = 2): #bits = k * 2a + 2k * 2m *n Variant: Gshare (Scott McFarling’93): GA which takes logic OR of PC address bits and branch history bits ACA H.Corporaal
Accuracy (taking the best combination of parameters): GA(0,11,5,2) 98 PA(10, 6, 4, 2) 97 96 95 Bimodal 94 GAs Branch Prediction Accuracy (%) 93 PAs 92 91 89 64 128 256 1K 2K 4K 8K 16K 32K 64K Predictor Size (bytes) ACA H.Corporaal
Accuracy of Different Branch Predictors 18% Mispredictions Rate 0% 4096 Entries 2-bit BHTUnlimited Entries 2-bit BHT1024 Entries (2,2) BHT ACA H.Corporaal
BHT Accuracy • Mispredict because either: • Wrong guess for that branch • Got branch history of wrong branch when index the table • 4096 entry table: misprediction rates vary from 1% (nasa7, tomcatv) to 18% (eqntott), with spice at 9% and gcc at 12% • For SPEC92, 4096 about as good as infinite table • Real programs + OS more like gcc ACA H.Corporaal
Tag branch PC PC if taken Branch Target Buffer • Branch condition is not enough !! • Branch Target Buffer (BTB): Tag and Target address PC 10…..10 101 00 Yes: instruction is branch. Use predicted PC as next PC if branch predicted taken. Branch prediction (often in separate table) =? No: instruction is not a branch. Proceed normally ACA H.Corporaal
Instruction Fetch Stage Not shown: hardware needed when prediction was wrong 4 Instruction Memory Instruction register PC BTB found & taken target address ACA H.Corporaal
Special Case: Return Addresses • Register indirect branches: hard to predict target address • MIPS instruction: jr r31 ; PC = r31 • useful for • implementing switch/case statements • FORTRAN computed GOTOs • procedure return (mainly) • SPEC89: 85% such branches for procedure return • Since stack discipline for procedures, save return address in small buffer that acts like a stack: 8 to 16 entries has very high hit rate ACA H.Corporaal
Dynamic Branch Prediction Summary • Prediction important part of scalar execution • Branch History Table: 2 bits for loop accuracy • Correlation: Recently executed branches correlated with next branch • Either different branches • Or different executions of same branch • Branch Target Buffer: include branch target address (& prediction) • Return address stack for prediction of indirect jumps ACA H.Corporaal
Or: Avoid branches ! ACA H.Corporaal
Predicated Instructions • Avoid branch prediction by turning branches into conditional or predicated instructions: • If false, then neither store result nor cause exception • Expanded ISA of Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, SPARC have conditional move; PA-RISC can annul any following instr. • IA-64/Itanium: conditional execution of any instruction • Examples: if (R1==0) R2 = R3; CMOVZ R2,R3,R1 if (R1 < R2) SLT R9,R1,R2 R3 = R1; CMOVNZ R3,R1,R9 else CMOVZ R3,R2,R9 R3 = R2; ACA H.Corporaal
Dynamic Scheduling ACA H.Corporaal
This instruction cannot continue even though it does not depend on anything Dynamic Scheduling Principle • What we examined so far is static scheduling • Compiler reorders instructions so as to avoid hazards and reduce stalls • Dynamic scheduling: hardware rearranges instruction execution to reduce stalls • Example: DIV.D F0,F2,F4 ; takes 24 cycles and ; is not pipeline ADD.D F10,F0,F8 SUB.D F12,F8,F14 • Key idea: Allow instructions behind stall to proceed • Book describes Tomasulo algorithm, but we describe general idea ACA H.Corporaal
Advantages ofDynamic Scheduling • Handles cases when dependences unknown at compile time • e.g., because they may involve a memory reference • It simplifies the compiler • Allows code compiled for one or no pipeline to run efficiently on a different pipeline • Hardware speculation, a technique with significant performance advantages, that builds on dynamic scheduling ACA H.Corporaal
Superscalar Concept Instruction Memory Instruction Instruction Cache Decoder Reservation Stations Branch Unit ALU-1 ALU-2 Logic & Shift Load Unit Store Unit Address Data Cache Data Reorder Buffer Data Register File Data Memory ACA H.Corporaal
Superscalar Issues • How to fetch multiple instructions in time (across basic block boundaries) ? • Predicting branches • Non-blocking memory system • Tune #resources(FUs, ports, entries, etc.) • Handling dependencies • How to support precise interrupts? • How to recover from mis-predicted branch path? • For the latter two issues we need to look at sequential look-ahead and architectural state • Ref: Johnson 91 ACA H.Corporaal
Example of Superscalar Processor Execution • Superscalar processor organization: • simple pipeline: IF, EX, WB • fetches 2 instructions each cycle • 2 ld/st units, dual-ported memory; 2 FP adders; 1 FP multiplier • Instruction window (buffer between IF and EX stage) is of size 2 • FP ld/st takes 1 cc; FP +/- takes 2 cc; FP * takes 4 cc; FP / takes 8 cc Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L.D F6,32(R2) L.D F2,48(R3) MUL.D F0,F2,F4 SUB.D F8,F2,F6 DIV.D F10,F0,F6 ADD.D F6,F8,F2 MUL.D F12,F2,F4 ACA H.Corporaal
Example of Superscalar Processor Execution • Superscalar processor organization: • simple pipeline: IF, EX, WB • fetches 2 instructions each cycle • 2 ld/st units, dual-ported memory; 2 FP adders; 1 FP multiplier • Instruction window (buffer between IF and EX stage) is of size 2 • FP ld/st takes 1 cc; FP +/- takes 2 cc; FP * takes 4 cc; FP / takes 8 cc Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L.D F6,32(R2) IF L.D F2,48(R3) IF MUL.D F0,F2,F4 SUB.D F8,F2,F6 DIV.D F10,F0,F6 ADD.D F6,F8,F2 MUL.D F12,F2,F4 ACA H.Corporaal
Example of Superscalar Processor Execution • Superscalar processor organization: • simple pipeline: IF, EX, WB • fetches 2 instructions each cycle • 2 ld/st units, dual-ported memory; 2 FP adders; 1 FP multiplier • Instruction window (buffer between IF and EX stage) is of size 2 • FP ld/st takes 1 cc; FP +/- takes 2 cc; FP * takes 4 cc; FP / takes 8 cc Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L.D F6,32(R2) IF EX L.D F2,48(R3) IF EX MUL.D F0,F2,F4 IF SUB.D F8,F2,F6 IF DIV.D F10,F0,F6 ADD.D F6,F8,F2 MUL.D F12,F2,F4 ACA H.Corporaal
Example of Superscalar Processor Execution • Superscalar processor organization: • simple pipeline: IF, EX, WB • fetches 2 instructions each cycle • 2 ld/st units, dual-ported memory; 2 FP adders; 1 FP multiplier • Instruction window (buffer between IF and EX stage) is of size 2 • FP ld/st takes 1 cc; FP +/- takes 2 cc; FP * takes 4 cc; FP / takes 8 cc Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L.D F6,32(R2) IF EX WB L.D F2,48(R3) IF EX WB MUL.D F0,F2,F4 IF EX SUB.D F8,F2,F6 IF EX DIV.D F10,F0,F6 IF ADD.D F6,F8,F2 IF MUL.D F12,F2,F4 ACA H.Corporaal
Example of Superscalar Processor Execution • Superscalar processor organization: • simple pipeline: IF, EX, WB • fetches 2 instructions each cycle • 2 ld/st units, dual-ported memory; 2 FP adders; 1 FP multiplier • Instruction window (buffer between IF and EX stage) is of size 2 • FP ld/st takes 1 cc; FP +/- takes 2 cc; FP * takes 4 cc; FP / takes 8 cc Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L.D F6,32(R2) IF EX WB L.D F2,48(R3) IF EX WB MUL.D F0,F2,F4 IF EX EX SUB.D F8,F2,F6 IF EX EX DIV.D F10,F0,F6 IF ADD.D F6,F8,F2 IF MUL.D F12,F2,F4 stall because of data dep. cannot be fetched because window full ACA H.Corporaal
Example of Superscalar Processor Execution • Superscalar processor organization: • simple pipeline: IF, EX, WB • fetches 2 instructions each cycle • 2 ld/st units, dual-ported memory; 2 FP adders; 1 FP multiplier • Instruction window (buffer between IF and EX stage) is of size 2 • FP ld/st takes 1 cc; FP +/- takes 2 cc; FP * takes 4 cc; FP / takes 8 cc Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L.D F6,32(R2) IF EX WB L.D F2,48(R3) IF EX WB MUL.D F0,F2,F4 IF EX EX EX SUB.D F8,F2,F6 IF EX EX WB DIV.D F10,F0,F6 IF ADD.D F6,F8,F2 IF EX MUL.D F12,F2,F4 IF ACA H.Corporaal
Example of Superscalar Processor Execution • Superscalar processor organization: • simple pipeline: IF, EX, WB • fetches 2 instructions each cycle • 2 ld/st units, dual-ported memory; 2 FP adders; 1 FP multiplier • Instruction window (buffer between IF and EX stage) is of size 2 • FP ld/st takes 1 cc; FP +/- takes 2 cc; FP * takes 4 cc; FP / takes 8 cc Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L.D F6,32(R2) IF EX WB L.D F2,48(R3) IF EX WB MUL.D F0,F2,F4 IF EX EX EX EX SUB.D F8,F2,F6 IF EX EX WB DIV.D F10,F0,F6 IF ADD.D F6,F8,F2 IF EX EX MUL.D F12,F2,F4 IF cannot execute structural hazard ACA H.Corporaal
Example of Superscalar Processor Execution • Superscalar processor organization: • simple pipeline: IF, EX, WB • fetches 2 instructions each cycle • 2 ld/st units, dual-ported memory; 2 FP adders; 1 FP multiplier • Instruction window (buffer between IF and EX stage) is of size 2 • FP ld/st takes 1 cc; FP +/- takes 2 cc; FP * takes 4 cc; FP / takes 8 cc Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L.D F6,32(R2) IF EX WB L.D F2,48(R3) IF EX WB MUL.D F0,F2,F4 IF EX EX EX EX WB SUB.D F8,F2,F6 IF EX EX WB DIV.D F10,F0,F6 IF EX ADD.D F6,F8,F2 IF EX EX WB MUL.D F12,F2,F4 IF ? ACA H.Corporaal
Register Renaming • A technique to eliminate anti- and output dependencies • Can be implemented • by the compiler • advantage: low cost • disadvantage: “old” codes perform poorly • in hardware • advantage: binary compatibility • disadvantage: extra hardware needed • We describe general idea ACA H.Corporaal
before: add r3,r3,4 after: add R2,R1,4 mapping table: mapping table: r0 r0 R8 R8 r1 r1 R7 R7 r2 r2 R5 R5 r3 r3 R1 R2 r4 r4 R9 R9 free list: free list: R2 R6 R6 Register Renaming • there’s a physical register file larger than logical register file • mapping table associates logical registers with physical register • when an instruction is decoded • its physical source registers are obtained from mapping table • its physical destination register is obtained from a free list • mapping table is updated ACA H.Corporaal
Eliminating False Dependencies • How register renaming eliminates false dependencies: • Before: • addi r1, r2, 1 • addi r2, r0, 0 • addi r1, r0, 1 • After (free list: R7, R8, R9) • addi R7, R5, 1 • addi R8, R0, 0 • addi R9, R0, 1 ACA H.Corporaal
Limitations of Multiple-Issue Processors • Available ILP is limited (we’re not programming with parallelism in mind) • Hardware cost • adding more functional units is easy • more memory ports and register ports needed • dependency check needs O(n2) comparisons • Limitations of VLIW processors • Loop unrolling increases code size • Unfilled slots waste bits • Cache miss stalls pipeline • Research topic: scheduling loads • Binary incompatibility (not EPIC) ACA H.Corporaal
Measuring available ILP: How? • Using existing compiler • Using trace analysis • Track all the real data dependencies (RaWs) of instructions from issue window • register dependence • memory dependence • Check for correct branch prediction • if prediction correct continue • if wrong, flush schedule and start in next cycle ACA H.Corporaal
Trace set r1,0 set r2,3 set r3,&A st r1,0(r3) add r1,r1,1 add r3,r3,4 brne r1,r2,Loop st r1,0(r3) add r1,r1,1 add r3,r3,4 brne r1,r2,Loop st r1,0(r3) add r1,r1,1 add r3,r3,4 brne r1,r2,Loop add r1,r5,3 Trace analysis Compiled code set r1,0 set r2,3 set r3,&A Loop: st r1,0(r3) add r1,r1,1 add r3,r3,4 brne r1,r2,Loop add r1,r5,3 Program For i := 0..2 A[i] := i; S := X+3; How parallel can this code be executed? ACA H.Corporaal
Trace analysis Parallel Trace set r1,0 set r2,3 set r3,&A st r1,0(r3) add r1,r1,1 add r3,r3,4 st r1,0(r3) add r1,r1,1 add r3,r3,4 brne r1,r2,Loop st r1,0(r3) add r1,r1,1 add r3,r3,4 brne r1,r2,Loop brne r1,r2,Loop add r1,r5,3 Max ILP = Speedup = Lparallel / Lserial = 16 / 6 = 2.7 Is this the maximum? ACA H.Corporaal
Ideal Processor Assumptions for ideal/perfect processor: 1. Register renaming– infinite number of virtual registers => all register WAW & WAR hazards avoided 2. Branch and Jump prediction– Perfect => all program instructions available for execution 3. Memory-address alias analysis– addresses are known. A store can be moved before a load provided addresses not equal Also: • unlimited number of instructions issued/cycle (unlimited resources), and • unlimited instruction window • perfect caches • 1 cycle latency for all instructions (FP *,/) Programs were compiled using MIPS compiler with maximum optimization level ACA H.Corporaal
Upper Limit to ILP: Ideal Processor Integer: 18 - 60 FP: 75 - 150 IPC ACA H.Corporaal
Window Size and Branch Impact • Change from infinite window to examine 2000 and issue at most 64 instructions per cycle FP: 15 - 45 Integer: 6 – 12 IPC PerfectTournamentBHT(512)ProfileNo prediction ACA H.Corporaal
Impact of Limited Renaming Registers • Changes: 2000 instr. window, 64 instr. issue, 8K 2-level predictor (slightly better than tournament predictor) FP: 11 - 45 Integer: 5 - 15 IPC Infinite2561286432 ACA H.Corporaal
Memory Address Alias Impact • Changes: 2000 instr. window, 64 instr. issue, 8K 2-level predictor, 256 renaming registers FP: 4 - 45 (Fortran, no heap) Integer: 4 - 9 IPC PerfectGlobal/stack perfectInspectionNone ACA H.Corporaal
Window Size Impact • Assumptions: Perfect disambiguation, 1K Selective predictor, 16 entry return stack, 64 renaming registers, issue as many as window FP: 8 - 45 IPC Integer: 6 - 12 ACA H.Corporaal