1 / 64

CSE 502 Graduate Computer Architecture Lec 1-3 - Introduction

CSE 502 Graduate Computer Architecture Lec 1-3 - Introduction. Larry Wittie Computer Science, StonyBrook University http://www.cs.sunysb.edu/~cse502 and ~lw Slides adapted from David Patterson, UC-Berkeley cs252-s06. Outline. Computer Science at a Crossroads

landis
Download Presentation

CSE 502 Graduate Computer Architecture Lec 1-3 - Introduction

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. CSE 502 Graduate Computer Architecture Lec 1-3 - Introduction Larry Wittie Computer Science, StonyBrook University http://www.cs.sunysb.edu/~cse502 and ~lw Slides adapted from David Patterson, UC-Berkeley cs252-s06 CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  2. Outline • Computer Science at a Crossroads • Computer Architecture v. Instruction Set Arch. • How would you like your CSE502? • What Computer Architecture brings to table • Quantitative Principles of Design • Technology Performance Trends • Careful, Quantitative Comparisons CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  3. Crossroads: Conventional Wisdom in Comp. Arch • Old Conventional Wisdom: Power is free, Transistors expensive • New Conventional Wisdom: “Power wall” Power expensive, Xtors free (Can put more on chip than can afford to turn on) • Old CW: Can increase Instruction Level Parallelism more via compilers, innovation (Out-of-order, speculation, VLIW, …) • New CW: “ILP wall” law of diminishing returns on more HW for ILP • Old CW: Multiplies are slow, Memory access is fast • New CW: “Memory wall” Memory slow, multiplies fast(200 clock cycles to DRAM memory, 4 clocks for multiply) • Old CW: Uniprocessor performance 2X / 1.5 yrs • New CW: Power Wall + ILP Wall + Memory Wall = Brick Wall • Uniprocessor performance now 2X / 5(?) yrs  Sea change in chip design: multiple “cores” (2X processors per chip / ~ 2 years) • Increase on-chip number of simple processors that are power efficient • Simple processor “cores” use less power per useful calculation done CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  4. Crossroads: Uniprocessor Performance From Hennessy and Patterson, Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach, 4th edition, October, 2006 • VAX : 25%/year 1978 to 1986 • RISC + x86: 52%/year 1986 to 2002 • RISC + x86: ??%/year 2002 to 2006 CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  5. Sea Change in Chip Design • Intel 4004 (1971): 4-bit processor,2312 transistors, 0.4 MHz, 10 micron PMOS, 11 mm2 chip • RISC II (1983): 32-bit, 5 stage pipeline, 40,760 transistors, 3 MHz, 3 micron NMOS, 60 mm2 chip (6 x 10 mm) • Today (2006) 125 mm2 chip, 0.065 micron CMOS = 2312 RISC II+FPU+Icache+Dcache • RISC II shrinks to ~ 0.02 mm2 at 65 nm • Caches via DRAM or 1 transistor SRAM (www.t-ram.com) ? • Proximity Communication via capacitive coupling at > 1 TB/s ?(Ivan Sutherland @ Sun / Berkeley) • Processor is the new transistor? CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  6. Déjà vu all over again? • Multiprocessors imminent in 1970s, ‘80s, ‘90s, … • “… today’s processors … are nearing an impasse as technologies approach the speed of light..” David Mitchell, The Transputer: The Time Is Now (1989) • Transputer was premature  Custom multiprocessors strove to lead uniprocessors Procrastination rewarded: 2X seq. perf. / 1.5 years • “We are dedicating all of our future product development to multicore designs. … This is a sea change in computing” Paul Otellini, President, Intel (2004) • Difference is all microprocessor companies switch to multiprocessors (AMD, Intel, IBM, Sun; all new Apples 2 CPUs)  Procrastination penalized: 2X sequential perf. / 5 yrs Biggest programming challenge: going from 1 to 2 CPUs CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  7. Problems with Sea Change • Algorithms, Programming Languages, Compilers, Operating Systems, Architectures, Libraries, … not ready to supply Thread Level Parallelism or Data Level Parallelism for 1000 CPUs / chip, • Architectures not ready for 1000 CPUs / chip • Unlike Instruction Level Parallelism, cannot be solved by just by computer architects and compiler writers alone, but also cannot be solved without participation of computer architects • This edition of CSE 502 (and 4th Edition of textbook Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach) explores shift from Instruction Level Parallelism to Thread Level Parallelism / Data Level Parallelism CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  8. Outline • Computer Science at a Crossroads • Computer Architecture v. Instruction Set Arch. • How would you like your CSE502? • What Computer Architecture brings to table • Quantitative Principles of Design • Technology Performance Trends • Careful, Quantitative Comparisons CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  9. Instruction Set Architecture: Critical InterfaceThe computing system as seen by programmers • Properties of a good abstraction • Lasts through many generations (portability) • Used in many different ways (generality) • Provides convenient functionality to higher levels • Permits an efficient implementation at lower levels • What matters today is performance of complete computer systems software instruction set hardware CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  10. Example: MIPS r0 r1 ° ° ° r31 0 Programmable storage 2^32 x bytes 31 x 32-bit GPRs (R0=0) 32 x 32-bit FP regs (paired DP) HI, LO, PC Data types ? Format ? Addressing Modes? PC lo hi • Arithmetic logical • Add, AddU, Sub, SubU, And, Or, Xor, Nor, SLT, SLTU, • AddI, AddIU, SLTI, SLTIU, AndI, OrI, XorI, LUI • SLL, SRL, SRA, SLLV, SRLV, SRAV • Memory Access • LB, LBU, LH, LHU, LW, LWL,LWR • SB, SH, SW, SWL, SWR • Control • J, JAL, JR, JALR • BEq, BNE, BLEZ,BGTZ,BLTZ,BGEZ,BLTZAL,BGEZAL 32-bit instructions on word boundary CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  11. Outline • Computer Science at a Crossroads • Computer Architecture v. Instruction Set Arch. • How would you like your CSE502? • What Computer Architecture brings to table • Quantitative Principles of Design • Technology Performance Trends • Careful, Quantitative Comparisons CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  12. CSE502: Administrivia Instructor: Prof Larry Wittie Office/Lab: 1308 CompSci, lw AT icDOTsunysbDOTedu Office Hours: MW, 3:45 - 5:15 pm, if door open, or appt. T. A.: To Be Determined Class: MW, 2:20 - 3:40 pm 2120 Comp Sci Text: Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach, 4th Ed. (Oct, 2006), ISBN 0123704901 or 978-0123704900, $60 Amazon F09 Web page: http://www.cs.sunysb.edu/~cse502/ First reading assignment: Chapter 1 for today, Monday Appendix A (at back of text) for Wednesday CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  13. CSE 502 Course Focus Understanding design techniques, machine structures, technology factors & evaluation methods that will determine the form of computers in 21st Century Parallelism Technology Programming Languages Applications Interface Design (ISA) Computer Architecture: • Organization • Hardware/Software Boundary Compilers Operating Measurement & Evaluation History Systems • Computer architecture is at a crossroads • Institutionalization and renaissance • Power, dependability, multi CPU vs. 1 CPU performance CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  14. Coping with CSE 502 • Undergrads must have taken CSE320 • Grad Students with too varied background? • You will have a difficult time if you have not had an undergrad course using a Hennessy & Patterson text. • Grads without CSE320 equivalent may have to work hard; Review: CSE502 text Appendix A, B, C; the CSE320 home page; and maybe CSE320 text Computer Organization and Design (COD) 3/e • Read chapters 1 to 8 of COD if you never took the prerequisite • If took a class, be sure COD Chapters 2, 6, 7 are very familiar • We will spend 2 week-long lectures on review of Pipelining (App. A) and Memory Hierarchy (App. C), before an in-class quiz to check if everyone is OK. CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  15. Grading • 18% Homeworks (practice for the exams) • 74% Exams: {4% Quiz, 20% Midterm, 50% Final Exam} • 8% (Optional) Research Project (work in pairs) • you need to show initiative • Pick a topic (more on this later) • give oral presentation or poster session • written report like a conference paper • 5 weeks work full-time for 2 people • opportunity to do “research in the small” to help make transition from good undergrad student to research colleague I may add up to 3% to a student’s final score, usually given only to people showing marked improvement during the course. CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  16. Outline • Computer Science at a Crossroads • Computer Architecture v. Instruction Set Arch. • How would you like your CSE502? • What Computer Architecture brings to table • Quantitative Principles of Design • Technology Performance Trends • Careful, Quantitative Comparisons CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  17. What Computer Architecture Brings to Table Quantitative Principles of Design • Take Advantage of Parallelism • Principle of Locality • Focus on the Common Case • Amdahl’s Law • The Processor Performance Equation Culture of anticipating and exploiting advances in technology- technology performance trends Careful, quantitative comparisons • Define, quantify, and summarize relative performance • Define and quantify relative cost • Define and quantify dependability • Define and quantify power Culture of crafting well-defined interfaces that are carefully implemented and thoroughly checked CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  18. 1) Taking Advantage of Parallelism • Increasing throughput of server computer via multiple processors or multiple disks • Detailed HW design • Carry lookahead adders uses parallelism to speed up computing sums from linear to logarithmic in number of bits per operand • Multiple memory banks searched in parallel in set-associative caches • Pipelining: overlap instruction execution to reduce the total time to complete an instruction sequence. • Not every instruction depends on immediate predecessor  executing instructions completely/partially in parallel possible • Classic 5-stage pipeline: 1) Instruction Fetch (Ifetch), 2) Register Read (Reg), 3) Execute (ALU), 4) Data Memory Access (Dmem), 5) Register Write (Reg) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  19. Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg ALU Ifetch DMem ALU Ifetch Ifetch Ifetch DMem DMem DMem ALU ALU Time (clock cycles) Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7 I n s t r. O r d e r Pipelined Instruction Execution Is Faster CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  20. Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Ifetch Ifetch Ifetch Ifetch DMem DMem DMem DMem ALU ALU ALU ALU Limits to Pipelining • Hazards prevent next instruction from executing during its designated clock cycle • Structural hazards: attempt to use the same hardware to do two different things at once • Data hazards: Instruction depends on result of prior instruction still in the pipeline • Control hazards: Caused by delay between the fetching of instructions and decisions about changes in control flow (branches and jumps). Time (clock cycles) I n s t r. O r d e r CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  21. 2) The Principle of Locality => Caches ($) • The Principle of Locality: • Programs access a relatively small portion of the address space at any instant of time. • Two Different Types of Locality: • Temporal Locality (Locality in Time): If an item is referenced, it will tend to be referenced again soon (e.g., loops, reuse) • Spatial Locality (Locality in Space): If an item is referenced, items whose addresses are close by tend to be referenced soon (e.g., straight-line code, array access) • For 30 years, HW has relied on locality for memory perf. MEM P $ CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  22. Levels of the Memory Hierarchy Capacity Access Time Cost Staging Xfer Unit Upper Level CPU Registers 100s Bytes 300 – 500 ps (0.3-0.5 ns) Registers prog./compiler 1-8 bytes Instr. Operands Faster L1 Cache L1 and L2 Cache 10s-100s K Bytes ~1 ns - ~10 ns $1000s/ GByte cache cntlr 32-64 bytes Blocks L2 Cache cache cntlr 64-128 bytes Blocks Main Memory G Bytes 80ns- 200ns ~ $100/ GByte Memory OS 4K-8K bytes Pages Disk 10s T Bytes, 10 ms (10,000,000 ns) ~ $0.25 / GByte Disk user/operator Mbytes Files Larger Tape Vault Semi-infinite sec-min ~$1 / GByte Tape Lower Level CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  23. 3) Focus on the Common Case“Make Frequent Case Fast and Rest Right” • Common sense guides computer design • Since its engineering, common sense is valuable • In making a design trade-off, favor the frequent case over the infrequent case • E.g., Instruction fetch and decode unit used more frequently than multiplier, so optimize it first • E.g., If database server has 50 disks / processor, storage dependability dominates system dependability, so optimize it 1st • Frequent case is often simpler and can be done faster than the infrequent case • E.g., overflow is rare when adding 2 numbers, so improve performance by optimizing more common case of no overflow • May slow down overflow, but overall performance improved by optimizing for the normal case • What is frequent case and how much performance improved by making case faster => Amdahl’s Law CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  24. Example: An I/O bound server gets a new CPU that is 10X faster, but 60% of server time is spent waiting for I/O. 4) Amdahl’s Law - Partial Enhancement Limits Best to ever achieve: A 10X faster CPU allures, but the server is only 1.6X faster. CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  25. CPU time = Seconds = Instructions x Cycles x Seconds Program Program Instruction Cycle CPI 5) Processor performance equation Inst count CPU time = Inst Count x CPI x Clock Cycle Program X Compiler X (X) Inst. Set. X X Organization X X Technology X Cycle time CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  26. What Determines a Clock Cycle? • At transition edge(s) of each clock pulse, state devices sample and save their present input signals • Past: 1 cycle = time for signals to pass 10 levels of gates • Today: determined by numerous time-of-flight issues + gate delays • clock propagation, wire lengths, drivers Latch or register combinational logic CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  27. What Computer Architecture brings to Table Quantitative Principles of Design • Take Advantage of Parallelism • Principle of Locality • Focus on the Common Case • Amdahl’s Law • The Processor Performance Equation Culture of anticipating and exploiting advances in technology- technology performance trends Careful, quantitative comparisons • Define, quantify, and summarize relative performance • Define and quantify relative cost • Define and quantify dependability • Define and quantify power Culture of well-defined interfaces that are carefully implemented and thoroughly checked CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  28. Moore’s Law: 2X transistors / “year [or 2]” “Cramming More Components onto Integrated Circuits” • Gordon Moore, Electronics, 1965 # on transistors / cost-effective integrated circuit double every N months (12 ≤ N ≤ 24) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  29. Tracking Technology Performance Trends • Drill down into 4 technologies: • Disks, • Memory, • Network, • Processors • Compare ~1980 Archaic (Nostalgic) vs. ~2000 Modern (Newfangled) • Performance Milestones in each technology • Compare for Bandwidth vs. Latency improvements in performance over time • Bandwidth: number of events per unit time • E.g., M bits / second over network, M bytes / second from disk • Latency: elapsed time for a single event • E.g., one-way network delay in microseconds, average disk access time in milliseconds CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  30. Seagate 373453, 2003 15000 RPM (4X) 73.4 GBytes (2500X) Tracks/Inch: 64,000 (80X) Bits/Inch: 533,000 (60X) Four 2.5” platters (in 3.5” form factor) Bandwidth:86 MBytes/sec (140X) Latency: 5.7 ms (8X) Cache: 8 MBytes CDC Wren I, 1983 3600 RPM 0.03 GBytes capacity Tracks/Inch: 800 Bits/Inch: 9,550 Three 5.25” platters Bandwidth: 0.6 MBytes/sec Latency: 48.3 ms Cache: none Disks: Archaic(Nostalgic) v. Modern(Newfangled) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  31. Performance Milestones Disk: 3600, 5400, 7200, 10000, 15000 RPM (8x, 143x) Latency Lags Bandwidth (for last ~20 years) (Latency = simple operation w/o contention, BW = best-case) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  32. 1980 DRAM(asynchronous) 0.06 Mbits/chip 64,000 xtors, 35 mm2 16-bit data bus per module, 16 pins/chip 13 Mbytes/sec Latency: 225 ns (no block transfer) 2000Double Data Rate Synchr. (clocked) DRAM 256.00 Mbits/chip (4000X) 256,000,000 xtors, 204 mm2 64-bit data bus per DIMM, 66 pins/chip (4X) 1600 Mbytes/sec (120X) Latency: 52 ns (4X) Block transfers (page mode) Memory: Archaic (Nostalgic) v. Modern (Newfangled) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  33. Performance Milestones Memory Module: 16bit plain DRAM, Page Mode DRAM, 32b, 64b, SDRAM, DDR SDRAM (4x,120x) Disk:3600, 5400, 7200, 10000, 15000 RPM (8x, 143x) Latency Lags Bandwidth (for last ~20 years) (Latency = simple operation w/o contention, BW = best-case) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  34. Ethernet 802.3 Year of Standard: 1978 10 Mbits/s link speed Latency: 3000 msec Shared media Coaxial cable "Cat 5" is 4 twisted pairs in bundle Twisted Pair: Copper, 1mm thick, twisted to avoid antenna effect LANs: Archaic (Nostalgic) v. Modern (Newfangled) • Ethernet 802.3ae • Year of Standard: 2003 • 10,000 Mbits/s (1000X)link speed • Latency: 190 msec (15X) • Switched media • Category 5 copper wire Coaxial Cable: Plastic Covering Braided outer conductor Insulator Copper core CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  35. Performance Milestones Ethernet: 10Mb, 100Mb, 1000Mb, 10000 Mb/s (16x,1000x) Memory Module:16bit plain DRAM, Page Mode DRAM, 32b, 64b, SDRAM, DDR SDRAM (4x,120x) Disk:3600, 5400, 7200, 10000, 15000 RPM (8x, 143x) Latency Lags Bandwidth (for last ~20 years) (Latency = simple operation w/o contention, BW = best-case) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  36. 1982 Intel 80286 12.5 MHz 2 MIPS (peak) Latency 320 ns 134,000 xtors, 47 mm2 16-bit data bus, 68 pins Microcode interpreter, separate FPU chip (no caches) 2001 Intel Pentium 4 1500MHz = 1.5 GHz (120X) 4500 MIPS (peak) (2250X) Latency 15 ns (20X) 42,000,000 xtors, 217 mm2 64-bit data bus, 423 pins 3-way superscalar,Dynamic translate to RISC, Superpipelined (22 stage),Out-of-Order execution On-chip 8KB Data caches, 96KB Instr. Trace cache, 256KB L2 cache CPUs: Archaic (Nostalgic) v. Modern (Newfangled) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  37. Performance Milestones Processor: ‘286, ‘386, ‘486, Pentium, Pentium Pro, Pentium 4 (21x,2250x) Ethernet: 10Mb, 100Mb, 1000Mb, 10000 Mb/s (16x,1000x) Memory Module: 16bit plain DRAM, Page Mode DRAM, 32b, 64b, SDRAM, DDR SDRAM (4x,120x) Disk : 3600, 5400, 7200, 10000, 15000 RPM (8x, 143x) CPU high, Memory low(“Memory Wall”) Δ.Latency Lags Δ.Bandwidth (for last 20 yrs) (Latency = simple operation w/o contention, BW = best-case) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  38. 6 Reasons LatencyLags Bandwidth 1. Moore’s Law helps BW more than latency • Faster transistors, more transistors, more pins help Bandwidth (cf.,MicroProcessing Unit, Dynamic RAM) • MPU Transistors: 0.130 vs. 42 M xtors (300X) • DRAM Transistors: 0.064 vs. 256 M xtors (4000X) • MPU Pins: 68 vs. 423 pins (6X) • DRAM Pins: 16 vs. 66 pins (4X) • Smaller, faster transistors but communicating over (relatively) longer lines: limits latency • Feature size: 1.5 to 3 vs. 0.18 micron (8X,17X) • MPU Die Size: 35 vs. 204 mm2 (ratio sqrt  2X) • DRAM Die Size: 47 vs. 217 mm2 (ratio sqrt  2X) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  39. 6 Reasons LatencyLags Bandwidth (cont’d) 2. Distance limits latency • Size of DRAM block long bit and word lines  most of DRAM access time • Speed of light and computers on network • 1. & 2. explains linear latency vs. square BW? 3. Bandwidth easier to sell (“bigger=better”) • E.g., 10 Gbits/s Ethernet (“10 Gig”) vs. 10 msec latency Ethernet • 4400 MB/s DIMM (“PC4400”) vs. 50 ns latency • Even if it is just marketing, customers are now trained • Since bandwidth sells, more resources thrown at bandwidth, which further tips the balance CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  40. 6 Reasons LatencyLags Bandwidth (cont’d) 4. Latency helps BW, but not vice versa • Spinning disk faster improves both bandwidth and rotational latency • 3600 RPM  15000 RPM = 4.2X • Average rotational latency: 8.3 ms  2.0 ms • Things being equal, also helps BW by 4.2X • Lower DRAM latency More access/second (higher bandwidth) • Higher linear density helps disk BW (and capacity), but not disk Latency • 9,550 BPI  533,000 BPI 60X in BW CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  41. 6 Reasons LatencyLags Bandwidth (cont’d) 5. Bandwidth hurts latency • Queues help Bandwidth, hurt Latency (Queuing Theory) • Adding chips to widen a memory module increases Bandwidth but higher fan-out on address lines may increase Latency 6. Operating System overhead hurts Latency more than Bandwidth • Long messages amortize overhead; overhead bigger part of short messages It takes longer to create and to send a long message, which is needed instead of a short message to lessen average cost per data byte of fixed size message overhead. “Bandwidth problems can be solved with $$, latency problems need prayer (to make light go faster).” CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  42. Summary of Technology Trends • For disk, LAN, memory, and microprocessor, bandwidth improves by more than the square of latency improvement • In the time that bandwidth doubles, latency improves by no more than 1.2X to 1.4X • Lag of gains for latency vs bandwidth probably even larger in real systems, as bandwidth gains multiplied by replicated components • Multiple processors in a cluster or even on a chip • Multiple disks in a disk array • Multiple memory modules in a large memory • Simultaneous communication in switched local area networks (LANs) • HW and SW developers should innovate assuming Latency Lags Bandwidth • If everything improves at the same rate, then nothing really changes • When rates vary, good designs require real innovation CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  43. Outline • Computer Science at a Crossroads • Computer Architecture v. Instruction Set Arch. • How would you like your CSE502? • Technology Trends: Culture of tracking, anticipating and exploiting advances in technology • Careful, quantitative comparisons: • Define and quantify power • Define and quantify dependability • Define, quantify, and summarize relative performance CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  44. Define and quantify power ( 1 / 2) • For CMOS chips, traditional dominant energy use has been in switching transistors, called dynamic power • For mobile devices, energy is a better metric • For a fixed task, slowing clock rate (the switching frequency) reduces power, but not energy • Capacitive load is function of number of transistors connected to output and the technology, which determines the capacitance of wires and transistors • Dropping voltage helps both, so ICs went from 5V to 1V • To save energy & dynamic power, most CPUs now turn off clock of inactive modules (e.g. Fltg. Pt. Arith. Unit) • If a 15% voltage reduction causes a 15% reduction in frequency, what is the impact on dynamic power? • New power/old = 0.852 x 0.85 = 0.853 = 0.614 “39% reduction” • {volt2 x freq} CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  45. Define and quantify power (2 / 2) • Because leakage current flows even when a transistor is off, now static power important too • Leakage current increases in processors with smaller transistor sizes • Increasing the number of transistors increases power even if they are turned off • In 2006, the goal for leakage is 25% of total power consumption; high performance designs allow 40% • Very low power systems even gate voltage to inactive modules to reduce losses because of leakage currents CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  46. Outline • Computer Science at a Crossroads • Computer Architecture v. Instruction Set Arch. • How would you like your CSE502? • Technology Trends: Culture of tracking, anticipating and exploiting advances in technology • Careful, quantitative comparisons: • Define and quantify power • Define and quantify dependability • Define, quantify, and summarize relative performance CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  47. Define and quantify dependability (1/3) • How to decide when a system is operating properly? • Infrastructure providers now offer Service Level Agreements (SLA) which are guarantees how dependable their networking or power service will be • Systems alternate between two states of service: • Service accomplishment (working), where the service is delivered as specified in SLA • Service interruption (not working), where the delivered service is different from the SLA • Failure = transition from state 1 (working) to state 2 • Restoration = transition from state 2 (not) to state 1 CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  48. Define and quantity dependability (2/3) • Module reliability = measure of continuous service accomplishment (or time to failure). • Mean Time To Failure (MTTF) measures Reliability • Failures In Time (FIT) = 1/MTTF, the failure rate • Usually reported as failures per billion hours of operation • Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) measures Service Interruption • Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) = MTTF+MTTR • Module availability measures service as alternate between the two states of accomplishment and interruption (number between 0 and 1, e.g. 0.9) • Module availability = MTTF / ( MTTF + MTTR) CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  49. Example calculating reliability • If modules have exponentially distributed lifetimes (the age of a module does not affect its probability of failure), the overall failure rate (FIT) is the sum of failure rates of the modules • Calculate FIT (rate) and MTTF (1/rate) for 10 disks (1M hour MTTF per disk), 1 disk controller (0.5M hour MTTF), and 1 power supply (0.2M hour MTTF): { x 109 } CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

  50. Outline • Computer Science at a Crossroads • Computer Architecture v. Instruction Set Arch. • How would you like your CSE502? • Technology Trends: Culture of tracking, anticipating and exploiting advances in technology • Careful, quantitative comparisons: • Define and quantify power • Define and quantify dependability • Define, quantify, and summarize relative performance CSE502-S10, Lec 01-3 - intro

More Related