The field of invention relates generally to communication in computer systems and, more specifically but not exclusively relates to techniques for enhanced peer-to-peer communication in SoC fabrics.
Computer systems typically employ one or more interconnects to facilitate communication between system components, such as between processors and memory. Interconnects and/or expansion interfaces may also be used to support built-in and add on devices, such as IO (input/output) devices and expansion cards and the like. For many years after the personal computer was introduced, the primary form of interconnect was a parallel bus. Parallel bus structures were used for both internal data transfers and expansion buses, such as ISA (Industry Standard Architecture), MCA (Micro Channel Architecture), EISA (Extended Industry Standard Architecture) and VESA Local Bus. In the early 1990's Intel Corporation introduced the PCI (Peripheral Component Interconnect) computer bus. PCI improved on earlier bus technologies by not only increasing the bus speed, but also introducing automatic configuration and transaction-based data transfers using shared address and data lines.
As time progressed, computer processor clock rates were increasing at a faster pace than parallel bus clock rates. As a result, computer workloads were often limited by interconnect bottlenecks rather than processor speed. Although parallel buses support the transfer of a large amount of data (e.g., 32 or even 64 bits under PCI-X) with each cycle, their clock rates are limited by timing skew considerations, leading to a practical limit to maximum bus speed. To overcome this problem, high-speed serial interconnects were developed. Examples of early serial interconnects include Serial ATA, USB (Universal Serial Bus), FireWire, and RapidIO. Another standard serial interconnect that is widely used is PCI Express (PCIe), which was introduced in 2004 under the PCIe 1.0 standard.
More recently, architectures commonly referred to as “System on a Chip” (SoC), have become prevalent in the computer industry. Rather than have external interconnects between discreet components, SoC employ internal interconnect that facilitate communication between various embedded components, such as processor cores and other IP (Intellectual Property) blocks. These IP blocks are typically connected via one or more interconnect architectures, such as an interconnect mesh (e.g., a cross-bar type interconnect), also referred to as an interconnect fabric, or simply “fabric,” and associated with agents that manage communication between the IP core components using an applicable communication protocol implemented by the interconnect.
Designing the communication fabric for SoCs can be very challenging. As the number of IP blocks on SoCs continue to increase, the amount of traffic congestion on interconnect fabrics likewise increases. However, bus-based or hierarchical-tree based fabrics encounter severe wire congestion and timing closure issues as more IP blocks and associated agents are integrated onto an SoC, limiting the scalability of these interconnect architectures. As a result, the on-chip communication fabrics of SoCs are now moving from buses and hierarchical tree fabric structures to more sophisticated interconnect fabrics, such as Networks-on-Chip (NoC), hybrid architectures and so on due to their scalability, modularity and ease for design reuse.
The foregoing aspects and many of the attendant advantages of this invention will become more readily appreciated as the same becomes better understood by reference to the following detailed description, when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein like reference numerals refer to like parts throughout the various views unless otherwise specified:
Embodiments of methods and apparatus for efficient peer-to-peer communication support in SoC fabrics are described herein. In the following description, numerous specific details are set forth to provide a thorough understanding of embodiments of the invention. One skilled in the relevant art will recognize, however, that the invention can be practiced without one or more of the specific details, or with other methods, components, materials, etc. In other instances, well-known structures, materials, or operations are not shown or described in detail to avoid obscuring aspects of the invention.
Reference throughout this specification to “one embodiment” or “an embodiment” means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the present invention. Thus, the appearances of the phrases “in one embodiment” or “in an embodiment” in various places throughout this specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment. Furthermore, the particular features, structures, or characteristics may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments.
Peer-to-peer communication support is an important feature in SoC fabric design. A significant challenge for peer-to-peer communication is the requirement to ensure correct ordering.
In current Intel® SoC platforms, peer-to-peer communication ordering is supported by buses and hierarchical tree fabric that support PCI-e ordering. However, when the interconnect structure moves from buses and hierarchical trees to more sophisticated fabric architectures, peer-to-peer support is becoming a significant challenge because ordering is not ensured in these advanced fabric architectures. One solution is to use a centralized ordering point in the interconnect fabric to ensure correct ordering is maintained. However, this approach increases the communication time and the centralized ordering point can become a bottleneck, as each request must be sent to the ordering point first for ordering before traveling to its destination. The designers can also use non-posted writes instead of posted writes for peer-to-peer communication. However, the non-posted write approach adds significant communication delay for peer-to-peer transactions because it requires an acknowledgement for each write issued before sending the next request, thus non-posted writes cannot meet the performance requirements in such systems.
In view of the foregoing and other performance considerations, a low overhead design to support direct peer-to-peer communications without a centralized ordering point in the interconnect fabrics is now presented.
For peer-to-peer communication, if two messages sent from different source agents are destined to the same destination agent and requires ordering, it is required that the messages sent first should arrive at the destination first. However, inside the fabric, as peer-to-peer messages from different source agents can take different routes to the same destination, it is highly likely that at some point a pair of messages destined for the same destination agent will arrive at the destination in different order from the time they are injected into the fabric. As a result, peer-to-peer ordering is not guaranteed.
The key consideration is the posted-write transaction ordering. To ensure proper peer-to-peer posted-write transaction ordering, a mechanism is implemented that guarantees posted-writes originating from the same source agent and going to different destination agents arrive at their respective destination in order. Using the example presented above in
In order to achieve this, in one embodiment a “Write Destination Register” (WDR) 312 is implemented in each NI 206, as shown in
For each posted-write transaction issued from an agent, the agent's NI first checks the destination agent for this write as well as the previous (i.e., most recent) posted-write destination as recorded in its WDR.
For read transactions, the NI always sends the requests to the destination directly through the fabric (no dummy transaction required). This is depicted in
Walkthrough Example
In this example, Agent C desires to read data from Agent B. However, this data is currently being written to Agent B by agent A, so there needs to be a mechanism to ensure that Agent C does not receive stale data from Agent B. This is accomplished via use of the dummy write technique discussed above, as further described in the following details.
Step 1: Agent A Issues Multiple Writes to Agent B
Step 2: Agent A Sends Flag to Agent C
Step 3: Agent C Issues Read to Agent B
For read request, the NI always sends them to the destination node directly. In this case, Agent C sends all the read requests to Agent B directly (as shown in
The foregoing illustrates one example of a series of operations performed by various agents and associated components to facilitate data transactions in a manner that ensures that each data request results in the most recent data being returned to the requester. Although the example is described in the context of a 2D mesh fabric, it will be understood that a similar approach may be used to ensure proper ordering operations in other type of interconnect architectures, as well, including interconnect structures employing buses, hierarchies, hybrids, etc.
In the foregoing walk-through example, an SoC configuration is depicted having each NI connect to one agent. The principles and teachings disclosed herein may also be implemented for NIs that connect to multiple agents simultaneously. In this case, the NI can have one WDR shared by all underlying agents or one WDR for each agent. The former is simpler but may generate unnecessary dummy writes under some circumstances, while the latter is more efficient, but is implemented with a bit more logic. Both methods ensure correct ordering for peer-to-peer communications and have very low hardware overhead.
Exemplary SoC Configuration Employing in NoC
A system 600 including an SoC 602 having an exemplary configuration under which aspects of the embodiments described herein may be implemented is shown in
Each IP block includes an agent 612 and a network interface 614. The IP blocks are illustrative of various types of IP block commonly used in SoCs, such as processor cores, hardware accelerators (e.g., video decoders, graphics, imaging, etc), memory-related components (e.g., memory controllers), and I/O interfaces (e.g., PCIe, QPI, etc.). In the illustrated embodiment, a pair of memory controllers 616 and 618 are depicted as coupled to respective memory blocks 620 and 622 (depicted as DIMM (Dual in-line Memory Modules)) and to respective routers in NoC 604. Also depicted is a system interface 624, which is illustrative of one or more interfaces between SoC 602 and other system components that are not shown. As will be recognized by those skilled in the art, an actually SoC would include additional components that are not shown in order to not obscure the NoC aspects illustrated in
In further detail, a typical processor core IP block might include a processor core coupled to or including one or more levels of cache memory (e.g., an L1/L2 cache). The cache, in turn, may employ an agent for facilitating coherent memory transactions with other cache and memory agents in the system. The agents may be employed for other purposes, as well, such as non-coherent memory transactions or other communication purposes. Moreover, although agents are depicted in
In addition to the logic for facilitating the transaction order and related operations discussed above, each network interface will include provisions for interfacing with the application interconnect fabric. For example, an interconnect fabric may comprises a serial multi-lane interconnect structure, such as Intel's QUICKPATH INTERCONNECT® (QPI), or Intel's KEIZER TECHNOLOGY INTERCONNECT® (KTI), an Open Core Protocol interconnect, other types of standardized or proprietary interconnects, as well as future interconnect technologies and protocols. Furthermore, the configuration of the NoC may include other types of interconnect fabric configurations, such as but not limited to torus and 3D mesh interconnects (e.g., an interconnect fabric that may be employed in future three-dimensional SoCs having IP blocks configured in a 3D array).
The above description of illustrated embodiments of the invention, including what is described in the Abstract, is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed. While specific embodiments of, and examples for, the invention are described herein for illustrative purposes, various equivalent modifications are possible within the scope of the invention, as those skilled in the relevant art will recognize.
These modifications can be made to the invention in light of the above detailed description. The terms used in the following claims should not be construed to limit the invention to the specific embodiments disclosed in the specification and the drawings. Rather, the scope of the invention is to be determined entirely by the following claims, which are to be construed in accordance with established doctrines of claim interpretation.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2012/021187 | 1/13/2012 | WO | 00 | 3/14/2013 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2013/105967 | 7/18/2013 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6584513 | Kallat | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6636928 | Brooks | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6950438 | Owen | Sep 2005 | B1 |
8982734 | Gasparakis | Mar 2015 | B2 |
20050091432 | Adams | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20060050693 | Bury | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20090274158 | Sharp | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090307408 | Naylor | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100268990 | Xu | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20110296129 | Arai | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120173846 | Wang | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120233504 | Patil | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20130083804 | Khoo | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130166812 | Boucard | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130185370 | Li | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130268711 | Safranek | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130304979 | Zimmer | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130343229 | Gasparakis | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140112339 | Safranek | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20160179738 | Guddeti | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160283399 | Das Sharma | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160283429 | Wagh | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160299860 | Harriman | Oct 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1575459 | Feb 2005 | CN |
101727413 | Jun 2010 | CN |
2013105967 | Jul 2013 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Office Action received for Taiwan Patent Application No. 102100694, mailed on May 20, 2015, 8 pages of English Translation and 8 pages of Taiwan Office Action. |
Office Action received for Taiwan Patent Application No. 102100694, mailed on Nov. 25, 2015, 4 pages of English Translation and 5 pages of Taiwan Office Action. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion of PCT/US2012/021187, mailed Jan. 13, 2012. 9 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion received for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2012/021187, mailed on Jul. 24, 2014, 6 Pages. |
Office Action received for Chinese Patent Application No. 201280066986.1, mailed on Aug. 23, 2016, 7 pages of Chinese Office Action. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130185370 A1 | Jul 2013 | US |