240 likes | 252 Views
Explore the design of branch predictors, analyzing the impact of delay, latency predictions, predictor caches, prediction accuracy vs IPC, and more. Understand the importance of latency reduction and prediction accuracy.
E N D
CS 7810 Lecture 6 The Impact of Delay on the Design of Branch Predictors D.A. Jimenez, S.W. Keckler, C. Lin Proceedings of MICRO-33 2000
Bimodal Predictor Table of 16K entries of 2-bit saturating counters 14 bits Branch PC
Global Predictor A single register that keeps track of recent history for all branches Table of 16K entries of 2-bit saturating counters 00110101 8 bits 6 bits Branch PC Also referred to as a two-level predictor
Local Predictor A two-level predictor that only uses local histories at the first level Branch PC Table of 16K entries of 2-bit saturating counters Use 6 bits of branch PC to index into local history table 10110111011001 14-bit history indexes into next level Table of 64 entries of 14-bit histories for a single branch
Tournament Predictors • A local predictor might work well for some branches or • programs, while a global predictor might work well for others • Provide one of each and maintain another predictor to • identify which predictor is best for each branch Local Predictor M U X Global Predictor Branch PC Tournament Predictor Table of 2-bit saturating counters
Terminology • GAG: Global history indexes into global array • of saturating counters • PAG: Per-address history indexes into global array • of saturating counters • GAP: Global history indexes into each PC’s private • array of counters (gselect) • PAP: Per-address history indexes into each PC’s • private array of counters
Prediction Accuracy Vs. IPC • Fig.1 – IPC saturates at around 1.28, assuming • single-cycle predictions • A 2KB predictor takes two cycles to access – • multi-cycle predictors can’t yield IPC > 1.0 • (reduced fetch bandwidth) • However, note that a single cycle predictor is • within 10% of optimal IPC (might not be true for • more aggressive o-o-o processors)
Long Latency Predictions • Total branch latency C = d + (r x p) • d = delay = 1 • r = mpred rate = 0.04 • p = penalty = 20 • Always better to reduce d than r • Note that correctly predicted branches are often • not on the program critical path
Branch Frequency • Branches are not as common as we think – on • average, they occur every 6 instructions, but 61% • of the time, there is at least 1 cycle of separation • Branches can be treated differently, based on • whether they can tolerate latency or not
Branch Predictor Cache • The cache is a subset of the 3-cycle predictor • and requires tags • ABP provides a prediction if there is a cache miss Xor of address and history 3-cycle PHT Tags 1-cycle PHT ABP Hit/Miss Prediction
Cascading Lookahead Prediction • Use the current PC to predict where the next • branch will go – initiate the look-up before you • see that branch • Use predictors with different latencies – when you • do see the branch, use the prediction available • to you • You can use a good prediction 60% of the time • and a poor prediction 40% of the time
Overriding Branch Predictor • Use a quick-and-dirty prediction • When you get the slow-and-clean prediction and • it disagrees, initiate recovery action • If prediction rates are 92% and 97%, 5% of all • branches see a 2-cycle mispredict penalty and • 3% see a 20-cycle penalty
Combining the Predictors? • Lookahead into a number of predictors • When you see a branch (after 3 cycles), use the • prediction from your cache (in case of a hit) or • the prediction from the regular 3-cycle predictor • (in case of a miss) • When you see the super-duper 5-cycle prediction, • let it override any previous incorrect prediction
Results (Fig.8) • The cache doesn’t seem to help at all (IPC of 1.1!) • (it is very surprising that the ABP and PHT have • matching predictions most of the time) • For the cascading predictor, the slow predictor is • used 45% of the time and it gives a better prediction • than the 1-cycle predictor 5.5% of the time • The overriding predictor disagrees 16.5% of the • time and yields an IPC of 1.2 – hmmm…
Alpha 21264 Predictor global history global history PC chooser PHT global predictor PHT local history 128 entries 512 entries PHT 128 entries 3200 bits
Alpha 21464 (EV8) • 352Kb! 2-cycle access time – 4 predictor arrays • accessed in parallel – overrides line prediction • 14-25 cycle mispredict penalty – 8-wide processor • -- 256 in-flight instructions
Predictor Sizes • All tables are indexed using combinations of • history and PC
2Bc-gskew BIM Address Pred G0 Vote Address+History G1 Meta
Rules • On a correct prediction • if all agree, no update • if they disagree, strengthen correct preds and chooser • On a misprediction • update chooser and recompute the prediction • on a correct prediction, strengthen correct preds • on a misprediction, update all preds
Design Choices • Local predictor was avoided because you need • up to 16 predictions in a cycle and it is hard • maintaining speculative local histories • You have no control over local histories – will need 16-ported PHT • Since global history is common for all 16 predictions, you can control indexing into PHT • They advocate the use of larger overriding • predictors for future technologies
Title • Bullet