VLIW Architectures Introductionaces.snu.ac.kr/~bernhard/teaching/4541.775/lecture/4541.775.7.VLI… · VLIW Introduction VLIW: Very Long Instruction Word (J.Fisher) multiple operations

VLIW Architectures

Introduction

Spring 2011

4541.775Topics on Compilers

VLIW Introduction

● Why VLIW?

● Very Long Instruction Words

● Methods to Increase Parallelism:Loop Unrolling, Software Pipelining, Scheduling Regions

● Problems of VLIW

● Specific Architecture Features

lecture notes based on various sources (Krste Asanovic, UC Berkeley; “Limits of InstructionLevel Parallelism” by David Wall)

VLIW Introduction

● Little’s Law

Parallelism = Throughput * Latency

latency in cycles

throughput per cycle

one operation

N̄=T̄×L̄

VLIW Introduction

● Example: Pipelined ILP Machine

● how much instructionlevel parallelism (ILP) is required to keep the machine pipelines busy?

two ALUs 1 cycle latency

two load/store units1 cycles latency

two FP units4 cycles latency

max throughput: six instructions per cycle

latency in cycles

T̄= 6 L̄=(2x1 + 2x3 + 2x4)

6= 2

23

N̄= 6 × 223=16

VLIW Introduction

● Superscalar Control Logic Scaling

● Each issued instruction must be checked against W*L instructions, i.e., the growth in hardware ∝ W*(W*L)

● For inorder machines, L is related to pipeline latencies● For outoforder machines, L also includes time spent in instruction

buffers (instruction window or ROB)● As W increases, a larger instruction window is needed to find enough

parallelism to keep machine busy => greater L

→ outoforder control logic grows faster than W2 (~W3)

Lifetime L

Issue Group

Previously Issued

Instructions

Issue Width W

VLIW Introduction

● Bottleneck of Sequential ISA

Check instruction dependencies

Superscalar processor

a = foo(b);

for (i=0;i<N;i++) ...

(sequential) source code

Superscalar compiler

Find independent operations

Schedule operations

Sequential machine code

Schedule execution

VLIW Introduction

● OutofOrder Control Complexity: MIPS R10000

Control Logic

[ SGI/MIPS Technologies Inc., 1995 ]

VLIW Introduction

● VLIW: Very Long Instruction Word (J.Fisher)

● multiple operations packed into one instruction● each operation slot is for a fixed function● constant operation latencies are specified● architecture requires guarantee of:

– parallelism within an instruction => no xoperation RAW check– no data use before data ready => no data interlocks

→ this is the job of the compiler

two ALUssingle cycle latency

two load/store units3 cycles latency two FP units

4 cycles latency

Int Op 2 Mem Op 1 Mem Op 2 FP Op 1 FP Op 2Int Op 1

VLIW Introduction

● VLIW Compiler Goals and Responsibilities

● schedule for maximum performance ( maximize parallel execution)→

● schedule operation types in specific slots (NOP)

● guarantee that data is available when it is used

● guarantee that no data hazards (interlocks) occur

VLIW Introduction

● Early VLIW Machines

● FPS AP120B (1976)

– scientific attached array processor

– first commercial wide instruction machine

– handcoded vector math libraries using software pipelining and loop unrolling

● Multiflow Trace (1987)

– commercialization of ideas from Fisher’s Yale group including “trace scheduling”

– available in configurations with 7, 14, or 28 operations/instruction

– 28 operations packed into a 1024bit instruction word

● Cydrome Cydra5 (1987)

– 7 operations encoded in 256bit instruction word

– rotating register file

VLIW Introduction

● Loop Execution

for (i=0; i<N; i++)

B[i] = A[i] + C;Int1 Int2 M1 M2 FP+ FPx

loop:

How many FP ops/cycle?

ld add r1

fadd

st add r2 bne

1 fadd / 8 cycles = 0.125

loop: ld f1, 0(r1)

add r1, 8

fadd f2, f0, f1

st f2, 0(r2)

add r2, 8

bne r1, r3, loop

compile

schedule

VLIW Introduction

● Loop Execution: Unrolling

for (i=0; i<N; i++)

B[i] = A[i] + C;

unroll 4 times

for (i=0; i<N; i+=4)

{

B[i] = A[i] + C;

B[i+1] = A[i+1] + C;

B[i+2] = A[i+2] + C;

B[i+3] = A[i+3] + C;

}

(requires extra code after theloop body to handle values ofN that are not a multiple of theunroll factor)

VLIW Introduction

● Loop Execution: Unrolling

Int1 Int2 M1 M2 FP+ FPxloop: ld f1, 0(r1)

ld f2, 8(r1)

ld f3, 16(r1) ld f4, 24(r1)

add r1, 32

fadd f5, f0, f1

fadd f6, f0, f2

fadd f7, f0, f3

fadd f8, f0, f4

st f5, 0(r2)

st f6, 8(r2)

st f7, 16(r2)

st f8, 24(r2)

add r2, 32

bne r1, r3, loop

schedule

loop: ld f1ld f2ld f3ld f4add r1 fadd f5

fadd f6fadd f7fadd f8

sd f5sd f6sd f7sd f8add r2 bne


4 fadd / 11 cycles = 0.36

VLIW Introduction

● Loop Execution: Software Pipelining

loop: ld f1, 0(r1)

ld f2, 8(r1)

ld f3, 16(r1) ld f4, 24(r1)

add r1, 32

fadd f5, f0, f1

fadd f6, f0, f2

fadd f7, f0, f3

fadd f8, f0, f4

st f5, 0(r2)

st f6, 8(r2)

st f7, 16(r2)

st f8, 24(r2)

add r2, 32

bne r1, r3, loop

schedule


4 fadd / 4 cycles = 1

Int1 Int 2 M1 M2 FP+ FPx

ld f1ld f2ld f3ld f4

fadd f5fadd f6fadd f7fadd f8

st f5st f6st f7st f8

add r1

add r2bne



st f5st f6st f7st f8

add r1

add r2bne



st f5

add r1

loop:

kernel

prolog

epilog

VLIW Introduction

● Software Pipelining vs. Loop Unrolling

time

performance

time

performance

Loop Unrolled

Software Pipelined

Startup overhead

Wind-down overhead

Loop Iteration

Loop Iteration

Software pipelining pays startup/wind-down costs only once per loop, not once per iteration

VLIW Introduction

● Techniques for Sequential Code

● Branches limit basic block size in controlflow intensive irregular code

● Difficult to find ILP in individual basic blocksBasic block

VLIW Introduction

● Trace Scheduling ( Fisher,Ellis)

● Pick string of basic blocks, a trace, that represents most frequent branch path

● Use profiling feedback or compiler heuristics to find common branch paths

● Schedule whole “trace” at once● Add fixup code to cope with branches jumping

out of trace

VLIW Intoduction

● IfConversion, Hyperblocks, Superblocks, Region Scheduling

● all techniques aiming at increasing the scheduling unit

● hardware support required for some

● complex compensation code

● more details in the next classes

Introduction to VLIW

● Compiler plays a Key Role

● without a decent compiler, a VLIW processor cannot achieve good performance

(B.Rau & J.Fisher)

VLIW Introduction

● Problems with “Classic” VLIW

● Objectcode compatibility

– have to recompile all code for every machine, even for two machines in same generation

● Object code size

– instruction padding wastes instruction memory/cache

– loop unrolling/software pipelining replicates code

● Scheduling variable latency memory operations

– caches and/or memory bank conflicts impose statically unpredictable variability

● Knowing branch probabilities

– Profiling requires an significant extra step in build process

● Scheduling for statically unpredictable branches

– optimal schedule varies with branch path

VLIW Introduction

● Object Code Compression

● Schemes to reduce effect of unused fields– Compressed format in memory, expand on Icache refill

» used in Multiflow Trace

» introduces instruction addressing challenge

– Mark parallel groups

» used in TMS320C6x DSPs, Intel IA64

– Provide a singleop VLIW instruction

» Cydra5 UniOp instructions

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

VLIW Introduction

● Architecture Support: Rotating Register Files

● Problem: scheduled loops require lots of registers, lots of duplicated code in prolog, epilog

Solution: Allocate new set of registers for each loop iteration

ld r1, ()

add r2, r1, #1

st r2, ()

ld r1, ()

add r2, r1, #1

st r2, ()

ld r1, ()

add r2, r1, #1

st r2, ()

ld r1, ()

add r2, r1, #1

st r2, ()

ld r1, ()

add r2, r1, #1

st r2, ()

ld r1, ()

add r2, r1, #1

st r2, ()

Prolog

Epilog

Kernel

VLIW Introduction


● Rotating Register Base (RRB) register points to base of current register set. Value added on to logical register specifier to give physical register number. Usually, split into rotating and nonrotating registers.

P0P1P2P3P4P5P6P7

RRB=3

+R1

dec RRB

bloop

dec RRB

dec RRB

dec RRBld r1, ()

add r3, r2, #1

st r4, ()

ld r1, ()

add r3, r2, #1

st r4, ()

ld r1, ()

add r2, r1, #1

st r4, ()

Prolog

Epilog

Kernel

Loop closing branch

decrements RRB

VLIW Introduction


bloopst f9, ()fadd f5, f4, ...ld f1, ()

Three cycle load latency encoded as difference of 3

in register specifier number (f4 - f1 = 3)

Four cycle fadd latency encoded as difference of 4

in register specifier number (f9 – f5 = 4)

bloopst P17, ()fadd P13, P12,ld P9, () RRB=8








Limits of InstructionLevel Parallelism

● Limits of InstructionLevel Parallelism

David Wall, 1993

http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/CompaqDEC/WRL936.html

http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/WRL-93-6.html

CS136 26

Limits to ILP

● Conflicting studies of amount● Benchmarks (vectorized Fortran FP vs. integer C programs)● Hardware sophistication● Compiler sophistication

● How much ILP is available using existing mechanisms with increasing HW budgets?

● Do we need to invent new HW/SW mechanisms to keep on processor performance curve?

● Intel MMX, SSE (Streaming SIMD Extensions): 64 bit ints ● Intel SSE2: 128 bit, including 2 64bit Fl. Pt. per clock● Motorola AltiVec: 128 bit ints and FPs● Supersparc Multimedia ops, etc.

CS136 27

Overcoming Limits

● Advances in compiler technology + significantly new and different hardware techniques may be able to overcome limitations assumed in studies

● However, unlikely such advances when coupled with realistic hardware will overcome these limits in near future

CS136 28

Limits to ILP

Initial HW Model here; MIPS compilers.

Assumptions for ideal/perfect machine to start:

1. Register renaming – infinite virtual registers => all register WAW & WAR hazards are avoided

2. Branch prediction – perfect; no mispredictions

3. Jump prediction – all jumps perfectly predicted (returns, case statements)2 & 3 ⇒ no control dependencies; perfect speculation & an unbounded buffer of instructions available

4. Memoryaddress alias analysis – addresses known & a load can be moved before a store provided addresses not equal; 1&4 eliminates all but RAW

Also: perfect caches; 1 cycle latency for all instructions (FP *,/); unlimited instructions issued/clock cycle

CS136 29

Model Power 5Instructions Issued per clock

Infinite 4

Instruction Window Size

Infinite 200

Renaming Registers

Infinite 48 integer + 40 Fl. Pt.

Branch Prediction Perfect 2% to 6% misprediction(Tournament Branch Predictor)

Cache Perfect 64KI, 32KD, 1.92MB L2, 36 MB L3

Memory Alias Analysis

Perfect ??

Limits to ILP HW Model comparison

CS136 30

Upper Limit to ILP: Ideal Machine

Programs

Instr

ucti

on

Issu

es p

er

cycle

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

gcc espresso li fpppp doducd tomcatv

54.862.6

17.9

75.2

118.7

150.1

Integer: 18 - 60

FP: 75 - 150

Ins

tru

cti

on

s P

er C

loc

k

CS136 31

New Model Model Power 5

Instructions Issued per clock

Infinite Infinite 4


Infinite, 2K, 512, 128, 32

Infinite 200

Renaming Registers

Infinite Infinite 48 integer + 40 Fl. Pt.

Branch Prediction

Perfect Perfect 2% to 6% misprediction(Tournament Branch Predictor)

Cache Perfect Perfect 64KI, 32KD, 1.92MB L2, 36 MB L3

Memory Alias

Perfect Perfect ??


CS136 32

5563

18

75

119

150

3641

15

61 59 60

1015 12

49

16

45

10 13 11

35

15

34

8 8 914

914

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

gcc espresso li fpppp doduc tomcatv

Instr

ucti

on

s P

er

Clo

ck

Infinite 2048 512 128 32

More Realistic HW: Window Impact

Change from Infinite window 2048, 512, 128, 32

FP: 9 - 150

Integer: 8 - 63

IPC

CS136 33



64 Infinite 4


2048 Infinite 200

Renaming Registers

Infinite Infinite 48 integer + 40 Fl. Pt.

Branch Prediction

Perfect vs. 8K Tournament vs. 512 2-bit vs. profile vs. none

Perfect 2% to 6% misprediction(Tournament Branch Predictor)


Memory Alias

Perfect Perfect ??


CS136 34

35

41

16

5860

9

1210

48

15

67 6

46

13

45

6 6 7

45

14

45

2 2 2

29

4

19

46

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Program

Inst

ruct

ion iss

ues

per

cyc

le

Perfect Selective predictor Standard 2-bit Static None

More Realistic HW: Branch Impact

Change from Infinite window to 2048, and maximum issue of 64 instructions per clock cycle

ProfileBHT (512)TournamentPerfect No prediction

FP: 15 - 45

Integer: 6 - 12

IPC

CS136 35

Misprediction Rates

1%

5%

14%12%

14%12%

1%

16%18%

23%

18%

30%

0%

3% 2% 2%4%

6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

tomcatv doduc fpppp li espresso gcc

Mis

pre

dic

tio

n R

ate

Profile-based 2-bit counter Tournament

CS136 36



64 Infinite 4


2048 Infinite 200

Renaming Registers

Infinite v. 256, 128, 64, 32, none

Infinite 48 integer + 40 Fl. Pt.

Branch Prediction

8K 2-bit Perfect Tournament Branch Predictor


Memory Alias

Perfect Perfect Perfect


CS136 37

11

15

12

29

54

10

15

12

49

16

10

1312

35

15

44

9 1011

20

11

28

5 56 5 5

74 4

54 5 5

59

45

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


Program

Instruction issuesper cycle

Infinite 256 128 64 32 None

More Realistic HW: Renaming Register Impact

Change to 2048 instr window, 64 instr issue, 8K 2 level Prediction

64 None256Infinite 32128

Integer: 5 - 15

FP: 11 - 45

IPC

CS136 38



64 Infinite 4


2048 Infinite 200

Renaming Registers

256 Int + 256 FP Infinite 48 integer + 40 Fl. Pt.

Branch Prediction

8K 2-bit Perfect Tournament


Memory Alias

Perfect v. Stack v. Inspect v. none

Perfect Perfect


CS136 39

Program

Inst

ruct

ion iss

ues

per

cycl

e

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


1 0

1 5

1 2

4 9

1 6

4 5

7 79

4 9

1 6

45 4 4

6 53

53 3 4 4

4 5

Perfect Global/stack Perfect Inspection None

More Realistic HW: Memory Address Alias Impact

Change 2048 instr window, 64 instr issue, 8K 2 level Prediction, 256 renaming registers

NoneGlobal/Stack perf;heap conflicts

Perfect CompilerInspection

FP: 4 - 45(Fortran,no heap)

Integer: 4 - 9IPC

CS136 40



64 (no restrictions)

Infinite 4


Infinite vs. 256, 128, 64, 32

Infinite 200

Renaming Registers

64 Int + 64 FP Infinite 48 integer + 40 Fl. Pt.

Branch Prediction

1K 2-bit Perfect Tournament


Memory Alias

HW disambiguation

Perfect Perfect


CS136 41

Program

Inst

ruct

ion iss

ues

per

cycl

e

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

gcc expresso li fpppp doducd tomcatv

1 0

1 5

1 2

5 2

1 7

5 6

1 0

1 5

1 2

4 7

1 6

1 0

1 31 1

3 5

1 5

3 4

91 0 1 1

2 2

1 2

8 8 9

1 4

9

1 4

6 6 68

79

4 4 4 5 46

3 2 3 3 3 3

4 5

2 2

Infinite 256 128 64 32 16 8 4

Realistic HW: Window Impact

Perfect disambiguation (HW), 1K Selective Prediction, 16 entry return, 64 registers, issue as many as window

64 16256Infinite 32128 8 4

Integer: 6 - 12

FP: 8 - 45

IPC

Documents

VLIW Architectures Introductionaces.snu.ac.kr/~bernhard/teaching/4541.775/lecture/4541.775.7.VLI… · VLIW Introduction VLIW: Very Long Instruction Word (J.Fisher) multiple operations