This invention relates to a method and apparatus to dynamically allocate access bandwidth to one or more resources, such as memory to the threads of a multi-threaded microprocessor. In the case of memory access this improves memory latency, and in particular avoids overloading of an automatic MIPS allocation (AMA) control system in periods of intensive memory activity.
Our British patent application no. 9607153.5 describes a multi-threaded processor and data processing management system in which a plurality of execution threads are routed between a plurality of data inputs and a plurality of data outputs via a data processing means. The data processing means has access to a data storage means. The system repeatedly determines which routing operations and which data processing operations are capable of being performed and commences execution of at least one of the routing or data processing operations on each clock cycle.
The typical sub-modules for such a multi-threaded processor is shown in
The microprocessor core 1 issues memory requests to the memory management unit 2. In the case where the required data is not in its local memory (ie a cache miss), the required data would have to fetched from the external memory. Since the external memory only has a single data path, memory prearbiter 3 is used for arbitrating between requests from different threads.
The simplest kind of arbitration scheme that can be used in
Firstly, conventional dynamic random access memories (DRAM) are organised into banks. These banks are divided into regions called pages. Generally speaking, before a location of the memory can be accessed, the relevant page has to be opened. After the access the memory may choose to keep the current page open(open page policy) or closed(close page policy). For example, if the memory is operating on the open page policy and the pre-arbiter chooses to send a memory access which is not in the same page as the last access, a high memory cycle latency will result due to amount of time needed to open a new page. On the other hand, if the memory is operating on the close page policy, sending a memory request in the same page as the last would similarly result in a high latency.
Secondly, the AMA of the multi-threaded processor addresses the problem of controlling the use of processor resources such that processing requirements of all programs running on all threads are to be met. The arbitration scheme of
Preferred embodiments of the present invention seek to optimise the memory latency in situations where more than one thread is requesting memory access. To achieve this, a register is used to store the page address of the last memory access accepted by the memory. For each access of each thread at the arbiter input the respective page addresses are calculated and compared with the page address held in the register storing the page address of the last memory access. This comparison can then be used to produce an in-page indication. In-page metrics of the various threads are then derived by multiplying the in-page indication with a user-defined weight, allowing user control over the in-page optimisation of memory accesses and between different threads. Note that memory with both open and close page policy could be optimised.
To solve the second problem a preferred embodiment generates another metric called the AMA metric. Firstly a subset of the AMA delay count and deadline count values are taken. These values are manipulated to produce the AMA metric. The subset for each thread for each count is individually selectable by the user to provide control of the extent of the AMA status that should affect the arbitration of memory accesses.
Preferred embodiments enable these two metrics to be either used individually or together in combination with a status thread priority to affect thread access to the memory.
Preferred embodiments of the invention will now be described in detail by way of example with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:
AMA extraction unit 4 performs subset selection manipulation and concatenation of various AMA counts into AMA metrics for each thread. The in-page metric generation block 7 performs storage of the last memory page address and comparison with the page address of the input request and the necessary manipulation to give the in-page metrics. Normally the manipulation simply comprises a multiplication.
The overall metric generation unit 5 includes all the logic needed to produce an overall metric for each thread for use by the arbitration logic 6 to derive its final thread decision. When threads are executing on the multi-threaded processor, each thread will provide AMA inputs and memory data and control inputs to the memory prearbiter which will then extract the AMA metrics and in-page metrics to produce an overall metric used by the arbitration logic to determine which thread should have access to the memory. The invention could be modified so that only the AMA metrics, or in-page metrics, or static thread priority is used to determine which thread has access to memory.
This per-thread in-page weighting allows the in-page effect of each thread to be independently fine-tuned. It also gives flexibility, for example establishing relative thread priorities by assigning different values to each thread, when requests of all threads are in-page.
The AMA extraction block for one of the threads is shown in
If the whole length of the two count values is used then quite stringent timing requirements will be imposed on the hardware in the following stages of the prearbiter. For example, the adders and comparators will have to work harder. In order to relieve this timing requirement whilst still allowing an acceptable usable range of sensitivity of the prearbiter to the AMA status, a bit slice of length 4 for example from each of the DEADLINE and DELAY COUNT are taken by a slice selection unit 10. As can be seen from
For each thread a respective adder 13 adds the AMA and the in-page metrics explained above to the fixed user specified thread priority. The range limiting logic then limits the sum to the maximum admissible value. The purpose of including the fixed thread priority is to enable the prearbiter to operate with a fixed thread priority scheme when AMA and/or in-page data is not being used.
The proposed overall thread priority metric above is suitable to be used for the thread decision because the higher of this value, the higher the importance of the request would be considered by the arbitration logic. For example, a user may regard the memory latency performance as important for a particular thread so that a large in-page weight is set thereby producing a large overall metric when an in-page optimisation opportunity arrives. This gives the request a high chance to be considered by the arbitration logic. In the context of AMA control, a higher value in the derived AMA metric would correspond to a thread that has been heavily under scheduled. This will allow the prearbiter to make sure the thread has high memory bandwidth to reduce the time needed by the AMA to revert to its normal scheduling, thus reducing the chance of other thread's AMA counts being saturated during this balancing period.
With an arbitration scheme based on an overall metric as discussed above, it is crucial that in both the situations that none of the execution threads are requesting or at least one execution thread is requesting, a sensibly and functionally correct cycle by cycle decision is generated. It is also crucial that in a situation where at least two execution threads have the same metric, the pre-arbiter should give equal shares of memory bandwidth to each of the threads, for example by using a round robin arbitration scheme.
The function of the re-ordering logic 15 is to assign each pair of the four inputs m_T0(v_T0) . . . m_T3(v_T3) to different output locations on every clock cycle. For example, on current cycle:
On the next cycle:
The purpose of this shifting and the rule which it is based upon will become apparent later on in the discussion.
The function of the comparator block 16 is to decide the highest overall metric amongst m_Ta, m_Tb, m_Tc and m_Td given their validity by v_Ta . . . v_Td, and output its corresponding thread number to be the ‘thread decision’. The truth table of such single comparator 17 in
From the table it can be seen that the rows marked in BOLD have only one definite output. For example in the second column, comparing a valid A1 with an invalid A0 must produce an output of A1. The other rows not marked in BOLD represent situations such as ‘neither execution thread is requesting’ or ‘the two metrics are the same’. It follows that these outputs could be assigned arbitrarily. In this embodiment, A0 would always be assigned the output.
With this scheme, it can be seen that if the re-ordering logic is by-passed(ie m_Ta=m_T0 . . . etc) and all the threads at the input of block 40 in
A final hardware block in
The above shows methods by which the thread priorities can be dynamically changed. Others are clearly possible. Whatever the metrics are, these metrics can then be used individually or in combination with other metrics to produce dynamic priority. For example, this system could use only the deadline count in numbers of clock cycles for access of each thread. In such a situation, the closer the access is to the deadline whilst still waiting to be granted, the higher the priority would be for that thread. The deadline settings can of course be changed at any time by a register to reflect the changes on the load of threads to ensure that all threads have time to complete execution.
The method described in generating an overall thread deciding metric that represents a user specified combination of the fixed and dynamic priority aspects of the input streams could be applied to any kind of arbiter. In this particular application it is shown as a memory pre-arbiter. The implementation allows the arbitration scheme to be based on round robin, in-page optimisation, and AMA status alone or on a scale or mixture of all three giving it much flexibility.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
0408553.6 | Apr 2004 | GB | national |