Methods and example implementations described herein are directed to interconnect architecture, and more specifically, to Network on Chip (NoC) architectures and the design and management thereof.
The number of components on a chip is rapidly growing due to increasing levels of integration, system complexity and shrinking transistor geometry. Complex System-on-Chips (SoCs) may involve a variety of components e.g., processor cores, Digital Signal Processors (DSPs), hardware accelerators, memory and I/O, while Chip Multi-Processors (CMPs) may involve a large number of homogenous processor cores, memory and I/O subsystems. In both SoC and CMP systems, the on-chip interconnect plays a role in providing high-performance communication between the various components. Due to scalability limitations of traditional buses and crossbar based interconnects, Network-on-Chip (NoC) has emerged as a paradigm to interconnect a large number of components on the chip. NoC is a global shared communication infrastructure made up of several routing nodes interconnected with each other using point-to-point physical links.
Messages are injected by the source and are routed from the source node to the destination over multiple intermediate nodes and physical links. The destination node then ejects the message and provides the message to the destination. For the remainder of this application, the terms ‘components’, ‘blocks’, ‘hosts’ or ‘cores’ will be used interchangeably to refer to the various system components which are interconnected using a NoC. Terms ‘routers’ and ‘nodes’ will also be used interchangeably. Without loss of generalization, the system with multiple interconnected components will itself be referred to as a ‘multi-core system’.
There are several topologies in which the routers can connect to one another to create the system network. Bi-directional rings (as shown in
Packets are message transport units for intercommunication between various components. Routing involves identifying a path composed of a set of routers and physical links of the network over which packets are sent from a source to a destination. Components are connected to one or multiple ports of one or multiple routers; with each such port having a unique ID. Packets carry route information such as the destination's router and port ID for use by the intermediate routers to route the packet to the destination component.
Examples of routing techniques include deterministic routing, which involves choosing the same path from A to B for every packet. This form of routing is independent from the state of the network and does not load balance across path diversities, which might exist in the underlying network. However, such deterministic routing may implemented in hardware, maintains packet ordering and may be rendered free of network level deadlocks. Shortest path routing may minimize the latency as such routing reduces the number of hops from the source to the destination. For this reason, the shortest path may also be the lowest power path for communication between the two components. Dimension-order routing is a form of deterministic shortest path routing in 2-D, 2.5-D, and 3-D mesh networks. In this routing scheme, messages are routed along each coordinates in a particular sequence until the message reaches the final destination. For example in a 3-D mesh network, one may first route along the X dimension until it reaches a router whose X-coordinate is equal to the X-coordinate of the destination router. Next, the message takes a turn and is routed in along Y dimension and finally takes another turn and moves along the Z dimension until the message reaches the final destination router. Dimension ordered routing may be minimal turn and shortest path routing.
In heterogeneous mesh topology in which one or more routers or one or more links are absent, dimension order routing may not be feasible between certain source and destination nodes, and alternative paths may have to be taken. The alternative paths may not be shortest or minimum turn.
Source routing and routing using tables are other routing options used in NoC. Adaptive routing can dynamically change the path taken between two points on the network based on the state of the network. This form of routing may be complex to analyze and implement.
A NoC interconnect may contain multiple physical networks. Over each physical network, there may exist multiple virtual networks, wherein different message types are transmitted over different virtual networks. In this case, at each physical link or channel, there are multiple virtual channels; each virtual channel may have dedicated buffers at both end points. In any given clock cycle, only one virtual channel can transmit data on the physical channel.
The physical channels are shared into a number of independent logical channels called virtual channels (VCs). VCs provide multiple independent paths to route packets, however they are time-multiplexed on the physical channels. A virtual channel holds the state needed to coordinate the handling of the flits of a packet over a channel. At a minimum, this state identifies the output channel of the current node for the next hop of the route and the state of the virtual channel (idle, waiting for resources, or active). The virtual channel may also include pointers to the flits of the packet that are buffered on the current node and the number of flit buffers available on the next node.
NoC interconnects may employ wormhole routing, wherein, a large message or packet is broken into small pieces known as flits (also referred to as flow control digits). The first flit is the header flit, which holds information about this packet's route and key message level info along with payload data and sets up the routing behavior for all subsequent flits associated with the message. Optionally, one or more body flits follows the head flit, containing the remaining payload of data. The final flit is the tail flit, which in addition to containing the last payload also performs some bookkeeping to close the connection for the message. In wormhole flow control, virtual channels are often implemented.
The term “wormhole” plays on the way messages are transmitted over the channels: the output port at the next router can be so short that received data can be translated in the head flit before the full message arrives, thereby facilitating the sending of the packet to the next router before the packet is fully received. This allows the router to quickly set up the route upon arrival of the head flit and then opt out from the rest of the conversation. Since a message is transmitted flit by flit, the message may occupy several flit buffers along its path at different routers so that the packet can exist in multiple routers, thereby creating a worm-like image.
Based upon the traffic between various end points, and the routes and physical networks that are used for various messages, different physical channels of the NoC interconnect may experience different levels of load and congestion. The capacity of various physical channels of a NoC interconnect is determined by the width of the channel (number of physical wires) and the clock frequency at which it is operating. Various channels of the NoC may operate at different clock frequencies, and various channels may have different widths based on the bandwidth requirement at the channel. The bandwidth requirement at a channel is determined by the flows that traverse over the channel and their bandwidth values. Flows traversing over various NoC channels are affected by the routes taken by various flows. In a mesh or Taurus NoC, there may exist multiple route paths of equal length or number of hops between any pair of source and destination nodes. For example, in
In a NoC with statically allocated routes for various traffic flows, the load at various channels may be controlled by intelligently selecting the routes for various flows. When a large number of traffic flows and substantial path diversity is present, routes can be chosen such that the load on all NoC channels is balanced nearly uniformly, thus avoiding a single point of bottleneck. Once routed, the NoC channel widths can be determined based on the bandwidth demands of flows on the channels. Unfortunately, channel widths cannot be arbitrarily large due to physical hardware design restrictions, such as timing or wiring congestion. There may be a limit on the maximum channel width, thereby putting a limit on the maximum bandwidth of any single NoC channel.
Additionally, wider physical channels may not help in achieving higher bandwidth if messages are short. For example, if a packet is a single flit packet with a 64-bit width, then no matter how wide a channel is, the channel will only be able to carry 64 bits per cycle of data if all packets over the channel are similar. Thus, a channel width is also limited by the message size in the NoC. Due to these limitations on the maximum NoC channel width, a channel may not have enough bandwidth in spite of balancing the routes.
To address the above bandwidth concern, multiple parallel physical NoCs may be used. Each NoC may be called a layer, thus creating a multi-layer NoC architecture. Hosts inject a message on a NoC layer; the message is then routed to the destination on the NoC layer, where it is delivered from the NoC layer to the host. Thus, each layer operates more or less independently from each other, and interactions between layers may only occur during the injection and ejection times.
In
In a multi-layer NoC, the number of layers needed may depend upon a number of factors such as the aggregate bandwidth requirement of all traffic flows in the system, the routes that are used by various flows, message size distribution, maximum channel width, etc. Once the number of NoC layers in NoC interconnect is determined in a design, different messages and traffic flows may be routed over different NoC layers. Additionally, one may design NoC interconnects such that different layers have different topologies in number of routers, channels and connectivity. The channels in different layers may have different widths based on the flows that traverse over the channel and their bandwidth requirements.
In a NoC interconnect, if the traffic profile is not uniform and there is a certain amount of heterogeneity (e.g., certain hosts talking to each other more frequently than the others), the interconnect performance may depend on the NoC topology and where various hosts are placed in the topology with respect to each other and to what routers they are connected to. For example, if two hosts talk to each other frequently and require higher bandwidth than other interconnects, then they should be placed next to each other. This will reduce the latency for this communication which thereby reduces the global average latency, as well as reduce the number of router nodes and links over which the higher bandwidth of this communication must be provisioned.
A NoC uses a shared network to pass traffic between different components. Any particular traffic flow might cross multiple routers before arriving at its destination. While the NoC can be efficient in terms of sharing wires, there can be an adverse effect on latency. Each router needs to arbitrate between its various inputs ports to decide which packet will be sent in a cycle. After the arbitration, the data must be selected through a multiplexing (muxing) structure. This process can take one or more cycles to complete, depending on the microarchitecture of the routers and the frequency. This means that for each router a traffic flow must cross, it can be incurring additional cycles of delay. Wire delay between routers can also cause delay.
To reduce latency, the routers can be built with bypass paths that allow skipping some or all of the arbitration and muxing costs of a router. These bypass paths can be used opportunistically when the router is idle, or they can support a simpler arbitration that allows a significant decrease in cycle time loss. Intelligent use of bypasses in a system can improve average latency of requests.
Longer latency can hurt the performance of the system. Reducing the latency of traffic flows is an important goal. The benefit of lower latency vary between different traffic flows. Some components are very latency sensitive, where each additional cycle of latency can have a significant performance reduction. Other flows will be less sensitive to latency. Intelligent setup of the bypasses can select the traffic flows that will provide the largest overall benefit to the system performance.
When packets finish traversing a NoC, they arrive at the interface to a component. Because a NoC can have many different kinds of traffic, design of the interface can have a big impact on performance. Many interface protocols use a method of flow control that doesn't distinguish between the contents of the packets. This can create head-of-line blocking issues, where a more important packet is stuck behind a less important packet.
The destination component can often benefit from distinguishing between different incoming traffic flows, allowing it to accept the more important flows and hold off the less important flows when resources are scares. Support of an enhanced interface can allow the destination component to signal the network which traffic flows it is willing to accept. The network can then choose which packets to send, avoiding the head-of-line blocking issue.
The enhanced interface flow control can be coupled with the networks use of virtual or physical channels to further avoid head-of-line blocking. If lower priority packets are transported in a separate channel from the higher priority packets, the destination component can backpressure one channel and allow the other to continue unimpeded.
Therefore, to address the aforementioned problems, there is a need for systems, methods, and non-transitory computer readable mediums to facilitate an opportunistic bypass system for a NoC, as well as a VC valid and credit system to facilitate the management of VCs of the NoC.
Aspects of the present disclosure involve a Network on Chip (NoC) having a plurality of channels and a valid-ready system with VC valid and VC credit going back, element configured to send a valid signal with a VC valid signal.
Aspects of the present disclosure further involve a network on chip (NoC) element involving a plurality of physical links and virtual links, and a configurable bypass between virtual links, and bypass logic configured to bypass the queue and the logic of the NoC element.
The bypass is configured to bypass the queue and the logic of the NoC element in an opportunistic manner in accordance with the desired implementation. The NoC can also involve a configurable router that has complete configurability in terms of which bypasses are available. The configurable router has output ports, in which any select input port can connect to an output port with a direct bypass.
Aspects of the present disclosure can further include methods and computer readable mediums directed to determining the selection of bypasses for NoC construction. Such methods and computer readable mediums can include algorithms that during NoC construction, create additional opportunities for bypassing. Such algorithms can include restrictions to bypass placement (e.g., connections requiring upsizing and downsizing do not have bypass) reshaping the NoC topology to create more links for the bypass, building the NoC to have equal number of ports with no clock crossing, and avoiding upsizing and downsizing links.
In example implementations, the algorithms for the creation of bypass paths can involve determining the possible bypass opportunities for the configurations based on restrictions, for each bypass opportunity, choosing which inputs go to the output based on calculation of expected traffic flows/bandwidth that are expected to have biggest impact on the specification (e.g., weighted average of traffic, also take latency and importance of traffic into consideration), and selecting the bypasses with the biggest benefit.
In example implementations, there can be algorithms such as a multiplexer selection algorithm to select which multiplexer to use (e.g., preselected versus post selected), opportunistic bypass processing (e.g., messages are sent through bypass if bypass is idle or if bypass is possible, bypass conducted based on latency and First In First Out (FIFO) depth).
In example implementations, there can be NoC elements and configuration methods wherein a single input port could be selected for use as a bypass to multiple output port subject to restrictions (e.g., output VC must be the same size as the input, different physical link sizes involve bypass links with matching VCs).
The following detailed description provides further details of the figures and example implementations of the present application. Reference numerals and descriptions of redundant elements between figures are omitted for clarity. Terms used throughout the description are provided as examples and are not intended to be limiting. For example, the use of the term “automatic” may involve fully automatic or semi-automatic implementations involving user or administrator control over certain aspects of the implementation, depending on the desired implementation of one of ordinary skill in the art practicing implementations of the present application.
In example implementations, a NoC interconnect is generated from a specification by utilizing design tools. The specification can contain constraints such as bandwidth/Quality of Service (QoS)/latency attributes that is to be met by the NoC, and can be in various software formats depending on the design tools utilized. Once the NoC is generated through the use of design tools on the specification to meet the specification requirements, the physical architecture can be implemented either by manufacturing a chip layout to facilitate the NoC or by generation of a register transfer level (RTL) for execution on a chip to emulate the generated NoC, depending on the desired implementation.
In a NoC, there is a network having routers and bridges. Other elements may also be present which can make the NoC fairly large. There may be an inherent latency problem with the NoC. In example implementations, bridges require activation for send messages into the network, and when messages are sent through the link, the router has to arbitrate the messages before the message is sent to the next hop.
For each hop running at a slow frequency, an entire router arbitration calculation including the travel time can be determined. However, most related art implementations are executed at a high frequency, wherein in such cases that the router arbitration may be conducted in a single cycle. Further, latency can be incurred in the bridge, with a cycle incurred in the bridge, a cycle for the link, a cycle for the router, and so on for the transaction. Latency reduction can be difficult due to the routers having arbitration requirements which incur a latency loss for arbitration in each router.
In example implementations, messages destined to bypass can be pre-arbitrated and then the only logic in the hop can be for determining which output channel is used for the bypass as determined by the bypass logic as illustrated in
In the following example implementations, requirements may be set for forwarding an input to the special bypass. One example requirement is that the link sizes are matched so latency from a width conversion is removed. Another example requirement is no clock crossing, so latency from clock conversion is also removed. Other requirements may also be set in according to the desired implementation.
Related art implementations implement a bypass path in a fixed position that is affixed to an input that is considered to be the most common bypass user. One example of a related art implementation is that an input destined for a particular direction will continually proceed in the direction (e.g. a south input port bypasses to the north input port). Such related art solutions are static.
In example implementations as illustrated in
In example implementations, the bypass configuration can be made during configuration time for the specification.
Example implementations can also analyze traffic flows so that an array is created based on the input ports (e.g. A, B, C, D, E, and F), and analyze how much of the traffic is coming in on a given link is going to a given output port. So for a given output port, analysis can be conducted by comparing the input ports and constructing a bypass based on the bandwidth consumed by the input ports to a given output port. For example, for a router wherein input port one is responsible for three gigabytes of output for output port X for a given time frame and input port two is responsible for six gigabytes for the given time frame, a bypass can be utilized between input port two and output port one.
At 503, locations for implementing a bypass are identified. The locations for implementing the bypass can be identified based on the traffic flow determinations, the hardware configuration of the router and by other methods according to the desired implementation. For example, simulations can be conducted to detect where latency as affected by wire length and travel length are taken into consideration. In such example implementations, output ports can be configured so that a bypass can be made available within the router. And so by converting the router with additional output ports, latency can be reduced. Thus, in example implementations, the optimization can involve determining which bypasses can be implemented to reduce latency and the location of such bypass. The optimization can involve a pre-optimization implementation where conditions for bypassing are identified, and bypasses can be implemented therein. By using design tools during the configuration time, path input algorithms can be utilized to determine the shortest path for the bypass for use in determining the location for implementing the bypass. Optimizations for placement of network elements can also be made to create additional opportunities for bypass in accordance with the desired implementation.
Bypasses may also be determined based on desired constraints. In an example constraint, the input VC width is set to match the output VC width. In such an example implementation, the physical link size may be different, however, the bypass is still utilized between the two physical links to connect matching input and output VCs.
At 504, the eligible routers are then configured with the bypass based on the determinations. As the routers are configurable in example implementations, a heterogeneous NoC with heterogeneous routers can thereby be implemented. Example implementations are in contrast to related art systems, which are directed to homogenous NoC systems and homogenous routers. Related art implementations involve bypasses that are stacked directionally on the assumption that the NoC is homogenous and is therefore static, whereas the example implementations of the present disclosure can utilize heterogeneous router and NoC configurations.
Example implementations described herein can be implemented as a hardwired bypass. In such example implementations, the software at configuration time can precompute where packets are going and can also utilize sideband information to the NoC. Sideband channels can be utilized for messages to determine which output port to utilize. Sideband information does not need to be utilized for controlling multiplexing to the output ports, but can be utilized control the validity of the output port. The routing information is processed, wherein example implementations calculate the route including the port.
As illustrated in
Example implementations can also involve algorithms for the creation of bypass paths. As illustrated in
Example implementations may also involve algorithms for selecting which multiplexer to incorporate into the NoC hardware element, which can be conducted in a preselected manner or configured after the NoC is designed, in accordance with the desired implementation.
Example implementations may also involve NoCs with hardware elements having differing physical channel sizes, but VCs with matching sizes to facilitate the bypass. The hardware elements may also be in the form of a configurable router that has complete configurability in terms of which bypasses are available. In an example implementation, the router design can involve having each output port associated with a selected input port with a direct bypass. Further, example implementations may involve a NoC element and configuration method wherein a single input port could be selected from bypass to multiple with restrictions. (e.g., if the output VC is the same size as the input.)
Virtualization Interface and Valid-Ready for Virtual Channels (VCs) and Other Types of Traffic
In related art implementations, NoC systems utilize a valid/ready handshake. In such a handshake protocol, one NoC element asserts a valid signal, and if the receiving NoC element asserts a ready signal at the same time, then a message transfer can occur between the two NoC elements. Such related art implementations may further have restrictions depending on the implementation (e.g. to prevent deadlock). In an example restriction, the NoC element does not wait for the valid signal to assert a ready signal, or vice versa. However, related art implementations of the valid/ready handshake are not aware of the actual status of VCs. In related art implementations, even if a request is made using the valid/ready handshake, the status of the VC to be used may actually be blocked. Further, other VCs within the physical channel may be available, but the related art implementations cannot discern their availability due to the NoC elements requiring a ready signal before proceeding. Such implementations may also apply to other traffic types where the valid/ready handshake is blocking the transmission. The destination element would benefit from being able to indicate which traffic flows it would like to receive through the issuance of credits or indication through the ready signal for that specific traffic type.
In example implementations, additional information is provided for a valid-ready handshake to address the issues with the related art. Example implementations utilize a valid-ready and credit based hybrid system to facilitate valid-ready handshake functionality. In a credit-based design for the example implementations, independent credits are allocated for each VC. The requesting NoC element transmits a request when a VC credit has been obtained.
Related art implementations utilize a sideband information channel to indicate which virtual channels are available. However, such information is potentially stale. Further, such implementations provide a bit vector that indicates VCs within a range are available (e.g. VCs 8-16) without specifically indicating which VCs are available and which are not.
In example implementations, a number of VCs on the NoC are associated with a physical interface. The physical interface can be associated with a number of interface VCs which can be mapped according to the desired implementation.
In an example implementation involving a master and slave, a NoC bridge is utilized. The NoC bridge communicates with a slave, which may have a plurality of virtual channels for the traffic. One virtual channel may involve high-priority CPU traffic (e.g. latency-sensitive traffic), another may involve I/O traffic, and another may involve asynchronous traffic which may be time critical, and so on. The properties of the virtual channels may also change over time, depending on the desired implementation.
In example implementations involving credit based implementation, as each channel can be separated and dedicated to the desired implementation, such implementations avoid the merger of traffic flows that should not be merged.
In the example implementation hybrid approach, the credit-based handshake is conducted between the agents while valid-ready requirements are enforced. In an example implementation, the target sends a credit back to the master indicating that a resource is available for a request. When the master tries to make that request, the target can indicate that it is not ready due to some delay (e.g. clock crossing). By utilizing the valid-ready with the credit system, it provides a way for temporary back-pressuring from the slave.
In example implementations, initialization is also facilitated as when the credit-based approach is applied, the NoC elements will determine the initialization. For example, the initialization of the credits can be zero, whereupon after a reset credits can be passed from the target NoC element to the requesting NoC element. Depending on the desired implementation, a certain number of credits can be provided at the master. However, if the reset for the NoC elements are unknown, the flow is harder to control, the valid-ready handshake can be utilized with the ready allowed for de-assertion. Even though the master element has VC credits, the master may be unable to transmit until the target NoC (slave) element is ready to accept the credits.
In example implementations, different virtual channels may involve different responses (e.g. read response, write response). In example implementations, there can be multiple virtual channels on the read interface going into another controller having only one read response channel. Thus, the congestion may go to the memory controller undergoing different arbitrations with a guaranteed drain. Each channel is completely independent, and they can be used for any purpose according to the desired implementation.
Example implementations involve a bookkeeping mechanism to track responses. Such a mechanism can involve a data structure to store information to track responses and when the responses are received. For example, if there are four VCs, the VCs can be broken into four segments with reservations. The arbiter may determine to send a flit if the NoC element has credit at the output. The example implementations can involve any partition of the data structure between the four VCs in any way according to the desired implementation. For example, each hardware element can be dedicated to a single VC, or pools of resources can be shared with some or all of the VCs. In example implementations, a mix of dedicated and shared resources can also be provided. Dedicated resources can ensure one channel cannot block another channel.
As illustrated in
Depending on the desired implementation, the transmitting hardware element can be configured to not transmit the VC valid signal on the virtual channel until a VC credit is obtained, and transmit the VC valid signal on the virtual channel to the at least one receiving hardware element on receipt of the VC credit based on the protocol of
In an example implementation, the plurality of channels can also involve virtual channels, with each of the physical channels being configurable to be independently controlled to adjust a number of VCs for each of the plurality of channels. Such implementations can be conducted by a NoC controller which is configured to define the number of VCs for a given physical channel. In an example implementation, the NoC may maintain the same quantity of VCs for read messages as for read response messages within a given physical channel through such a NoC controller, or they can be differing quantities depending on the desired implementation.
In example implementations, the NoC may include a configurable interface for the transmitting hardware element and the receiving hardware element, that configures the transmitting hardware element and the receiving hardware element for at least one of deadlock avoidance and quantity of virtual channels. Such configuration can be conducted through a NoC specification, wherein the interface can be in the form of a hardware/software interface or a hardware mechanism that processes the specification to configure the NoC for deadlock avoidance, and quantity of virtual channels.
In example implementations, the NoC may also include a virtual interface for virtual channels to interact with agents of a SoC. Such a virtual interface can be implemented in the NoC bridges, or can be part of the NoC depending on the desired implementation.
In example implementations, the transmitting element can be configured to manage VC credits received from one or more receiving hardware elements as illustrated in
In further example implementations, the receiving hardware element can be configured to provide a reservation for a VC to one or more transmitting hardware elements based on at least one of management of dedicated VC credits to the one or more of transmitting hardware elements, a shared tool providing certain minimum priority for the one or more transmitting hardware elements, and an inference of priority from the one or more of the at least one transmitting hardware element. Such reservations can include a pre-configuration so that certain hardware elements always have a certain number of VC credits reserved, priority inferred based on the type of message received or a hierarchy of hardware elements as defined in the NoC specification.
In example implementations there can be a system such as a NoC, a SoC, or any hardware element system that require a virtual channel interface that involves a plurality of channels; at least one receiving hardware element; and at least one transmitting hardware element configured to: transmit a valid signal to the at least one receiving hardware element on a channel of the plurality of channels, and transmit a virtual channel (VC) valid signal as a virtual channel indicator for a virtual channel of a plurality of virtual channels designated for transmission of data and transmit the data on the virtual channel designated for the transmission of the data; wherein the at least one receiving hardware element is configured to transmit a VC credit to the at least one transmitting hardware element as illustrated in
In example implementations, the at least one transmitting hardware element is configured to not transmit the data packet on the virtual channel until a VC credit is obtained. The plurality of channels can be physical channels that are partitioned into one or more virtual channels, and each of the channels can be configurable to be independently controlled for mapping to an interface virtual VCs. In such example implementations, multiple transmitting channels can map to a single interface virtual channel, or a single transmitting channel can map to multiple virtual channels depending on the desired implementation. In an example implementation involving a single transmitting channel mapping to multiple virtual channels, the transmission can be conducted when any of the VC credits are available. The mapping can be done through a virtual interface connected to the NoC to map virtual channels with transmitting elements such as agents of a SoC. Such interfaces can include read channels, read response channels, and so on depending on the desired implementation. In example implementations, the interface can include the decoder, queue, arbiter, multiplexer, and/or the output as illustrated in
In example implementations, the at least one transmitting element is further configured to manage VC credits received from one or more of the at least one receiving hardware element; and conduct arbitration based on whether a message destination is associated with a VC credit from the managed VC credits as illustrated in
In example implementations, the at least one transmitting hardware element is configured to arbitrate messages for transmitting through prioritizing messages that are associated with a VC credit through the user of the arbiter as illustrated in
In example implementations, the at least one receiving hardware element is configured to provide a reservation for a VC to one or more of the at least one transmitting hardware element based on at least one of management of dedicated VC credits to the one or more of the at least one transmitting hardware element, and an inference of priority from the one or more of the at least one transmitting hardware element based on the information of
In example implementations the at least one receiving hardware element can be a NoC element such as a router or a bridge and the at least one transmitting hardware element is an agent of the System on Chip (SoC), such as a memory or a CPU.
Although example implementations involve a NoC, other systems such as a SoC or other interconnect can be utilized in accordance with the desired implementation. Any hardware element that can utilize a virtual interface can take advantage of the example implementations described herein.
Unless specifically stated otherwise, as apparent from the discussion, it is appreciated that throughout the description, discussions utilizing terms such as “processing,” “computing,” “calculating,” “determining,” “displaying,” or the like, can include the actions and processes of a computer system or other information processing device that manipulates and transforms data represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system's registers and memories into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system's memories or registers or other information storage, transmission or display devices.
Example implementations may also relate to an apparatus for performing the operations herein. This apparatus may be specially constructed for the required purposes, or it may include one or more general-purpose computers selectively activated or reconfigured by one or more computer programs. Such computer programs may be stored in a computer readable medium, such as a computer-readable storage medium or a computer-readable signal medium. A computer-readable storage medium may involve tangible mediums such as, but not limited to optical disks, magnetic disks, read-only memories, random access memories, solid state devices and drives, or any other types of tangible or non-transitory media suitable for storing electronic information. A computer readable signal medium may include mediums such as carrier waves. The algorithms and displays presented herein are not inherently related to any particular computer or other apparatus. Computer programs can involve pure software implementations that involve instructions that perform the operations of the desired implementation.
Various general-purpose systems may be used with programs and modules in accordance with the examples herein, or it may prove convenient to construct a more specialized apparatus to perform desired method steps. In addition, the example implementations are not described with reference to any particular programming language. It will be appreciated that a variety of programming languages may be used to implement the teachings of the example implementations as described herein. The instructions of the programming language(s) may be executed by one or more processing devices, e.g., central processing units (CPUs), processors, or controllers.
As is known in the art, the operations described above can be performed by hardware, software, or some combination of software and hardware. Various aspects of the example implementations may be implemented using circuits and logic devices (hardware), while other aspects may be implemented using instructions stored on a machine-readable medium (software), which if executed by a processor, would cause the processor to perform a method to carry out implementations of the present disclosure. Further, some example implementations of the present disclosure may be performed solely in hardware, whereas other example implementations may be performed solely in software. Moreover, the various functions described can be performed in a single unit, or can be spread across a number of components in any number of ways. When performed by software, the methods may be executed by a processor, such as a general purpose computer, based on instructions stored on a computer-readable medium. If desired, the instructions can be stored on the medium in a compressed and/or encrypted format.
Moreover, other implementations of the present disclosure will be apparent to those skilled in the art from consideration of the specification and practice of the teachings of the present disclosure. Various aspects and/or components of the described example implementations may be used singly or in any combination. It is intended that the specification and example implementations be considered as examples only, with the true scope and spirit of the present disclosure being indicated by the following claims.
This regular U.S. patent application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/829,749, filed on Dec. 1, 2017 (now abandoned) which is based on and claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 from provisional U.S. patent application No. 62/429,695, filed on Dec. 2, 2016, the entire disclosures of which are incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4409838 | Schomberg | Oct 1983 | A |
4933933 | Dally | Jun 1990 | A |
5105424 | Flaig et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5163016 | Har'El et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5355455 | Hilgendorf et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5432785 | Ahmed et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5563003 | Suzuki et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5583990 | Birrittella et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5588152 | Dapp et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5764740 | Holender | Jun 1998 | A |
5790554 | Pitcher et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5859981 | Levin et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5991308 | Fuhrmann et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5999530 | LeMaire et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6003029 | Agrawal et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6029220 | Iwamura et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6058385 | Koza et al. | May 2000 | A |
6101181 | Passint et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108739 | James | Aug 2000 | A |
6249902 | Igusa et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6285679 | Dally et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6314487 | Hahn et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6377543 | Grover et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6415282 | Mukherjea et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6674720 | Passint et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6701361 | Meier | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711717 | Nystrom et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6778531 | Kodialam et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6925627 | Longway et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6967926 | Williams, Jr. et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6983461 | Hutchison et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7046633 | Carvey | May 2006 | B2 |
7065730 | Alpert et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7143221 | Bruce et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7318214 | Prasad et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
7379424 | Krueger | May 2008 | B1 |
7437518 | Tsien | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7461236 | Wentzlaff | Dec 2008 | B1 |
7509619 | Miller et al. | Mar 2009 | B1 |
7564865 | Radulescu | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7583602 | Bejerano et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7590959 | Tanaka | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7693064 | Thubert et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7701252 | Chow et al. | Apr 2010 | B1 |
7724735 | Locatelli et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7725859 | Lenahan et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
7774783 | Toader | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7808968 | Kalmanek, Jr. et al. | Oct 2010 | B1 |
7853774 | Wentzlaff | Dec 2010 | B1 |
7917885 | Becker | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7957381 | Clermidy et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7973804 | Mejdrich et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8018249 | Koch et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8020163 | Nollet et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8020168 | Hoover et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8050256 | Bao et al. | Nov 2011 | B1 |
8059551 | Milliken | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8098677 | Pleshek et al. | Jan 2012 | B1 |
8099757 | Riedle et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8136071 | Solomon | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8203938 | Gibbings | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8228930 | Kim et al. | Jul 2012 | B1 |
8261025 | Mejdrich et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8281297 | Dasu et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8285679 | Agombar et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8285912 | Feero et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8306042 | Abts | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8312402 | Okhmatovski et al. | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8352774 | Elrabaa | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8407425 | Gueron et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8412795 | Mangano et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8438578 | Hoover et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8448102 | Komachuk et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8490110 | Hoover et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8492886 | Or-Bach et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8503445 | Lo | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8514889 | Jayasimha | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8541819 | Or-Bach et al. | Sep 2013 | B1 |
8543964 | Ge et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8547972 | Mahdavi | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8572353 | Bratt et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8601423 | Philip | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8614955 | Gintis et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8619622 | Harrand et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8635577 | Kazda et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8661455 | Mejdrich et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8667439 | Kumar et al. | Mar 2014 | B1 |
8704548 | Hutton | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8705368 | Abts et al. | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8711867 | Guo et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8717875 | Bejerano et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8726295 | Hoover et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8738860 | Griffin et al. | May 2014 | B1 |
8793644 | Michel et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8798038 | Jayasimha et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8819611 | Philip et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8885510 | Kumar et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
9210048 | Marr et al. | Dec 2015 | B1 |
9223711 | Philip et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9244845 | Rowlands et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9244880 | Philip et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9253085 | Kumar et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9294354 | Kumar | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9319232 | Kumar | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9444702 | Raponi et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
9471726 | Kumar et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9473359 | Kumar et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9473388 | Kumar et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9473415 | Kumar | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9477280 | Gangwar et al. | Oct 2016 | B1 |
9515961 | Guo | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9529400 | Kumar et al. | Dec 2016 | B1 |
9535848 | Rowlands et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9568970 | Kaushal et al. | Feb 2017 | B1 |
9569579 | Kumar | Feb 2017 | B1 |
9571341 | Kumar et al. | Feb 2017 | B1 |
9571402 | Kumar et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9571420 | Kumar | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9590813 | Kumar et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9660942 | Kumar | May 2017 | B2 |
9699079 | Chopra et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9742630 | Philip et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
10419338 | Gray | Sep 2019 | B2 |
20020071392 | Grover et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020073380 | Cooke et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020083159 | Ward et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020095430 | Egilsson et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020150094 | Cheng et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030005149 | Haas et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030088602 | Dutta et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030145314 | Nguyen et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030200315 | Goldenberg et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040006584 | Vandeweerd | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040019814 | Pappalardo et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040049565 | Keller et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040103218 | Blumrich et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040156376 | Nakagawa | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040156383 | Nakagawa et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040216072 | Alpert et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050147081 | Acharya et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050203988 | Nollet et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050228930 | Ning et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050286543 | Coppola et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060002303 | Bejerano et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060031615 | Bruce et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060053312 | Jones et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060075169 | Harris et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060104274 | Caviglia et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060161875 | Rhee | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060206297 | Ishiyama et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060209846 | Clermidy et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060268909 | Langevin et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070038987 | Ohara et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070088537 | Lertora et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070118320 | Luo et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070147379 | Lee et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070162903 | Babb, II et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070189283 | Agarwal et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070244676 | Shang et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070256044 | Coryer et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070267680 | Uchino et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070274331 | Locatelli et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080072182 | He et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080120129 | Seubert | May 2008 | A1 |
20080126569 | Rhim et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080127014 | Pandey et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080184259 | Lesartre et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080186998 | Rijpkema | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080211538 | Lajolo et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080232387 | Rijpkema et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090037888 | Tatsuoka et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090046727 | Towles | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090067331 | Watsen et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090067348 | Vasseur et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090070726 | Mehrotra et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090083263 | Felch et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090089725 | Khan | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090109996 | Hoover et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090122703 | Gangwal et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090125574 | Mejdrich et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090125703 | Mejdrich et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090125706 | Hoover et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090135739 | Hoover et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090138567 | Hoover et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090150647 | Mejdrich et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157976 | Comparan et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090172304 | Gueron et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090182944 | Comparan et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090182954 | Mejdrich et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090182986 | Schwinn et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090182987 | Mejdrich et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090187716 | Comparan et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090187734 | Mejdrich et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090187756 | Nollet et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090201302 | Hoover et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090210184 | Medardoni et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090210883 | Hoover et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090228681 | Mejdrich et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090228682 | Mejdrich et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090228689 | Muff et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090228690 | Muff et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090231348 | Mejdrich et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090231349 | Mejdrich et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090240920 | Muff et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090245257 | Comparan et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090256836 | Fowler et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090260013 | Heil et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090268677 | Chou et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090271172 | Mejdrich et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090276572 | Heil et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282139 | Mejdrich et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282197 | Comparan et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282211 | Hoover et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282214 | Kuesel et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282221 | Heil et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282222 | Hoover et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282226 | Hoover et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282227 | Hoover et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090282419 | Mejdrich et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090285222 | Hoover et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090287885 | Kriegel et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090292907 | Schwinn et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090293061 | Schwinn et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090300292 | Fang et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090300335 | Muff et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090307714 | Hoover et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090313592 | Murali et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090315908 | Comparan et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100023568 | Hickey et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100031009 | Muff et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100040162 | Suehiro | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100042812 | Hickey et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100042813 | Hickey et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100070714 | Hoover et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100091787 | Muff et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100100707 | Mejdrich et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100100712 | Mejdrich et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100100770 | Mejdrich et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100100934 | Mejdrich et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100106940 | Muff et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100125722 | Hickey et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100158005 | Mukhopadhyay et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100162019 | Kumar et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100189111 | Muff et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100191940 | Mejdrich et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100211718 | Gratz et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100223505 | Andreev et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100228781 | Fowler et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100239185 | Fowler et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100239186 | Fowler et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100242003 | Kwok | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100269123 | Mejdrich et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100284309 | Allan et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100333099 | Kupferschmidt et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110022754 | Cidon et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110035523 | Feero et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110044336 | Umeshima | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110060831 | Ishii et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110063285 | Hoover et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110064077 | Wen | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110072407 | Keinert et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110085550 | Lecler et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110085561 | Ahn et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110103799 | Shacham et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110119322 | Li et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110154282 | Chang et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110173258 | Arimilli et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110191088 | Hsu et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110191774 | Hsu et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110235531 | Vangal et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110243147 | Paul | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110276937 | Waller | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110289485 | Mejdrich et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110292063 | Mejdrich et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110302345 | Boucard et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110302450 | Hickey et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110307734 | Boesen et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110316864 | Mejdrich et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110320719 | Mejdrich et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110320724 | Mejdrich et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110320771 | Mejdrich et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110320854 | Elrabaa | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110320991 | Hsu et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110321057 | Mejdrich et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120022841 | Appleyard | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120023473 | Brown | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120026917 | Guo et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120054511 | Brinks et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120072635 | Yoshida et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120079147 | Ishii et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120099475 | Tokuoka | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120110106 | De Lescure et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120110541 | Ge et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120144065 | Parker et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120155250 | Carney et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120173846 | Wang et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120176364 | Schardt et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120195321 | Ramanujam et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120198408 | Chopra | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120209944 | Mejdrich et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120218998 | Sarikaya | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120221711 | Kuesel et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120260252 | Kuesel et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120311512 | Michel et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130021896 | Pu et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130028083 | Yoshida et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130028090 | Yamaguchi et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130028261 | Lee | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130036296 | Hickey et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130044117 | Mejdrich et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130046518 | Mejdrich et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130051397 | Guo et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130054811 | Harrand | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130073771 | Hanyu et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130073878 | Jayasimha et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130080073 | de Corral | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130080671 | Ishii et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130086399 | Tychon et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130103369 | Huynh et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130103912 | Jones et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130111190 | Muff et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130111242 | Heller et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130117543 | Venkataramanan et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130138925 | Hickey et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130145128 | Schardt et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130148506 | Lea | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130151215 | Mustapha | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159668 | Muff et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159669 | Comparan et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159674 | Muff et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159675 | Muff et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159676 | Muff et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159944 | Uno et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130160026 | Kuesel et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130160114 | Greenwood et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130163615 | Mangano et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130174113 | Lecler et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130179613 | Boucard | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130179902 | Hoover et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130185542 | Mejdrich et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191572 | Nooney et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191600 | Kuesel et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191649 | Muff et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191651 | Muff et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191824 | Muff et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191825 | Muff et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130207801 | Barnes | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130219148 | Chen et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130250792 | Yoshida et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130254488 | Kaxiras et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130263068 | Cho et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130268990 | Urzi et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130294458 | Yamaguchi et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130305207 | Hsieh et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130311819 | Ishii et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130326458 | Kazda et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140013293 | Hsu et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140068132 | Philip et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140068134 | Philip et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140082237 | Wertheimer et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140086260 | Dai et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140092740 | Wang et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140098683 | Kumar | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140112149 | Urzi et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140115218 | Philip et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140115298 | Philip et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140126572 | Hutton et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140143557 | Kuesel et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140143558 | Kuesel et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140149720 | Muff et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140164465 | Muff et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140164704 | Kuesel et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140164732 | Muff et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140164734 | Muff et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140211622 | Kumar et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140229709 | Kuesel et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140229712 | Muff et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140229713 | Muff et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140229714 | Muff et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140229720 | Hickey et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140230077 | Muff et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140232188 | Cheriyan et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140241376 | Balkan et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140254388 | Kumar et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140281243 | Shalf et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140281402 | Comparan et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140307590 | Dobbelaere et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140359641 | Clark et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140376569 | Philip | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150020078 | Kuesel et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150026435 | Muff et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150026494 | Bainbridge et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150026500 | Muff et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150032988 | Muff et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150032999 | Muff et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150043575 | Kumar et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150081941 | Brown et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150103822 | Gianchandani et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150109024 | Abdelfattah et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150159330 | Weisman et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150178435 | Kumar | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150331831 | Solihin | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150348600 | Bhatia et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150381707 | How | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20170061053 | Kumar et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170063625 | Philip et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170063697 | Kumar | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20180159786 | Rowlands et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180183721 | Rowlands et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180183722 | Rowlands et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
103684961 | Mar 2014 | CN |
5936793 | May 2016 | JP |
6060316 | Jan 2017 | JP |
6093867 | Feb 2017 | JP |
10-2013-0033898 | Apr 2013 | KR |
101652490 | Aug 2016 | KR |
101707655 | Feb 2017 | KR |
2010074872 | Jul 2010 | WO |
2013063484 | May 2013 | WO |
2014059024 | Apr 2014 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Ababei, C., et al., Achieving Network on Chip Fault Tolerance by Adaptive Remapping, Parallel & Distributed Processing, 2009, IEEE International Symposium, 4 pgs. |
Abts, D., et al., Age-Based Packet Arbitration in Large-Radix k-ary n-cubes, Supercomputing 2007 (SC07), Nov. 10-16, 2007, 11 pgs. |
Beretta, I, et al., A Mapping Flow for Dynamically Reconfigurable Multi-Core System-on-Chip Design, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, Aug. 2011, 30(8), pp. 1211-1224. |
Das, R., et al., Aergia: Exploiting Packet Latency Slack in On-Chip Networks, 37th International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA '10), Jun. 19-23, 2010, 11 pgs. |
Ebrahimi, E., et al., Fairness via Source Throttling: A Configurable and High-Performance Fairness Substrate for Multi-Core Memory Systems, ASPLOS '10, Mar. 13-17, 2010, 12 pgs. |
Gindin, R., et al., NoC-Based FPGA: Architecture and Routing, Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Networks-on-Chip (NOCS'07), May 2007, pp. 253-262. |
Grot, B., Preemptive Virtual Clock: A Flexible, Efficient, and Cost-Effective QOS Scheme for Networks-on-Chip, Micro '09, Dec. 12-16, 2009, 12 pgs. |
Grot, B., Kilo-NOC: A Heterogeneous Network-on-Chip Architecture for Scalability and Service Guarantees, ISCA 11, Jun. 4-8, 2011, 12 pgs. |
Grot, B., Topology-Aware Quality-of-Service Support in Highly Integrated Chip Multiprocessors, 6th Annual Workshop on the Interaction between Operating Systems and Computer Architecture, Jun. 2006, 11 pgs. |
Hiestness, J., et al., Netrace: Dependency-Tracking for Efficient Network-on-Chip Experimentation, The University of Texas at Austin, Dept. of Computer Science, May 2011, 20 pgs. |
Jiang, N., et al., Performance Implications of Age-Based Allocations in On-Chip Networks, CVA MEMO 129, May 24, 2011, 21 pgs. |
Lee, J. W., et al., Globally-Synchronized Frames for Guaranteed Quality-of-Service in On-Chip Networks, 35th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA), Jun. 2008, 12 pgs. |
Lee, M. M., et al. Approximating Age-Based Arbitration in On-Chip Networks, PACT '10, Sep. 11-15, 2010, 2 pgs. |
Li, B. et al., CoQoS: Coordinating QoS-Aware Shared Resources in NoC-based SoCs, J. Parallel Distrib. Comput., 71(5), May 2011, 14 pgs. |
Lin, S., et al., Scalable Connection-Based Flow Control Scheme for Application-Specific Network-on-Chip, The Journal of China Universities of Posts and Telecommunications, Dec. 2011, 18(6), pp. 98-105. |
Bolotin, Evgency, et al., “QNoC: QoS Architecture and Design Process for Network on Chip” 2004, 24 pages, Journal of Systems Architecture 50 (2004) 105-128 Elsevier. |
Holsmark, Shashi Kumar Rickard, et al., “HiRA: A Methodology for Deadlock Free Routing in Hierarchical Networks on Chip”, 10 pages, (978-1-4244-4143-3/09 2009 IEEE). |
Munirul, H.M., et al., Evaluation of Multiple-Valued Packet Multiplexing Scheme for Network-on-Chip Architecture, Proceedings of the 36th International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic (ISMVL '06), 2006, 6 pgs. |
Rajesh BV, Shivaputra, “NOC: Design and Implementation of Hardware Network Interface With Improved Communication Reliability”, 7 pages, International Journal of VLSI and Embedded Systems, Ijives (vol. 04, Article 06116; Jun. 2013). |
Yang, J., et al., Homogeneous NoC-based FPGA: The Foundation for Virtual FPGA, 10th IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (CIT 2010), Jun. 2010, pp. 62-67. |
Zaman, Aanam, “Formal Verification of Circuit-Switched Network on Chip (NoC) Architectures using SPIN”, Oosman Hasan, IEEE © 2014, 8 pages. |
Benini, Luca, et al., “Networks on Chips: A New SoC Paradigm”, IEEE Computers, SOC Designs, pp. 70-78, Copyright 2002 IEEE. 0018-9162/02. |
Sethuraman, Ranga Vemuri Balasubramanian, “optiMap: A Tool for Automated Generation of NoC Architecture Using Multi-Port Routers for FPGAs”, IEEE, pp. 1-6, 2006. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/060745, dated Jan. 21, 2015, 10 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/060879, dated Jan. 21, 2015, 10 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/060892, dated Jan. 27, 2015, 10 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/060886, dated Jan. 26, 2015, 10 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2013/064140, dated Jan. 22, 2014, 9 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/012003, dated Mar. 26, 2014, 9 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/012012, dated May 14, 2014, 9 pgs. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/023625, dated Jul. 10, 2014, 9 pgs. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application No. PCT/US2013/064140, dated Apr. 14, 2015, 5 pages. |
Office Action for Korean Patent Application No. 10-2016-7019093 dated Sep. 8, 2016, 3 pages plus 1 page English translation. KIPO, Korea. |
Notice of Allowance for for Korean Patent Application No. 10-2016-7019093 dated Sep. 8, 2016, 4 pages. KIPO, Korea. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/037902, dated Sep. 30, 2014, 14 pgs. |
Office Action for Japanese Patent Application No. 2015-535898 dated Oct. 25, 2016, 2 pages English, 2 pages untranslated copy. Japan Patent Office. |
Notice of Grant for Japanese Patent Application No. 2015-535898 dated Jan. 17, 2017, 3 pages, untranslated. Japan Patent Office. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/048190, dated Nov. 28, 2014, 11 pgs. |
Office Action for Japanese Patent Application No. 2016-516030 dated Aug. 30, 2016, 2 pages, Japan Patent Office. |
Decision to Grant for Japanese Patent Application No. 2016-516030 dated Nov. 22, 2016, 6 pages, untranslated, Japan Patent Office. |
Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/829,749, dated Jan. 14, 2019, 14 pages. |
Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/903,425, dated Jan. 22, 2019, 8 pages. |
Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 15/903,557, dated Jan. 21, 2019, 10 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20180191626 A1 | Jul 2018 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62429695 | Dec 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15829749 | Dec 2017 | US |
Child | 15903633 | US |