1. Field of the Invention
The field of the invention is data processing, or, more specifically, methods, apparatus, and products for performing a local reduction operation on a parallel computer.
2. Description of Related Art
The development of the EDVAC computer system of 1948 is often cited as the beginning of the computer era. Since that time, computer systems have evolved into extremely complicated devices. Today's computers are much more sophisticated than early systems such as the EDVAC. Computer systems typically include a combination of hardware and software components, application programs, operating systems, processors, buses, memory, input/output devices, and so on. As advances in semiconductor processing and computer architecture push the performance of the computer higher and higher, more sophisticated computer software has evolved to take advantage of the higher performance of the hardware, resulting in computer systems today that are much more powerful than just a few years ago.
Parallel computing is an area of computer technology that has experienced advances. Parallel computing is the simultaneous execution of the same task (split up and specially adapted) on multiple processors in order to obtain results faster. Parallel computing is based on the fact that the process of solving a problem usually can be divided into smaller tasks, which may be carried out simultaneously with some coordination.
Parallel computers execute parallel algorithms. A parallel algorithm can be split up to be executed a piece at a time on many different processing devices, and then put back together again at the end to get a data processing result. Some algorithms are easy to divide up into pieces. Splitting up the job of checking all of the numbers from one to a hundred thousand to see which are primes could be done, for example, by assigning a subset of the numbers to each available processor, and then putting the list of positive results back together. In this specification, the multiple processing devices that execute the individual pieces of a parallel program are referred to as ‘compute nodes.’ A parallel computer is composed of compute nodes and other processing nodes as well, including, for example, input/output (‘I/O’) nodes, and service nodes.
Parallel algorithms are valuable because it is faster to perform some kinds of large computing tasks via a parallel algorithm than it is via a serial (non-parallel) algorithm, because of the way modern processors work. It is far more difficult to construct a computer with a single fast processor than one with many slow processors with the same throughput. There are also certain theoretical limits to the potential speed of serial processors. On the other hand, every parallel algorithm has a serial part and so parallel algorithms have a saturation point. After that point adding more processors does not yield any more throughput but only increases the overhead and cost.
Parallel algorithms are designed also to optimize one more resource the data communications requirements among the nodes of a parallel computer. There are two ways parallel processors communicate, shared memory or message passing. Shared memory processing needs additional locking for the data and imposes the overhead of additional processor and bus cycles and also serializes some portion of the algorithm.
Message passing processing uses high-speed data communications networks and message buffers, but this communication adds transfer overhead on the data communications networks as well as additional memory need for message buffers and latency in the data communications among nodes. Designs of parallel computers use specially designed data communications links so that the communication overhead will be small but it is the parallel algorithm that decides the volume of the traffic.
Many data communications network architectures are used for message passing among nodes in parallel computers. Compute nodes may be organized in a network as a ‘torus’ or ‘mesh,’ for example. Also, compute nodes may be organized in a network as a tree. A torus network connects the nodes in a three-dimensional mesh with wrap around links. Every node is connected to its six neighbors through this torus network, and each node is addressed by its x,y,z coordinate in the mesh. In such a manner, a torus network lends itself to point to point operations. In a tree network, the nodes typically are connected into a binary tree: each node has a parent, and two children (although some nodes may only have zero children or one child, depending on the hardware configuration). Although a tree network typically is inefficient in point to point communication, a tree network does provide high bandwidth and low latency for certain collective operations, message passing operations where all compute nodes participate simultaneously, such as, for example, an allgather operation. In computers that use a torus and a tree network, the two networks typically are implemented independently of one another, with separate routing circuits, separate physical links, and separate message buffers.
Collective operations involve data communications amongst many compute nodes and data processing within many compute nodes. In some embodiments, data communications are carried out in manner that is faster than the individual data processing carried out by each compute node. Therefore, increasing efficiency in local data processing by compute nodes when carrying out collective operations is desirable.
Methods, apparatus, and products for performing a local reduction operation on a parallel computer are disclosed. In embodiments of the present invention, the parallel computer includes a plurality of compute nodes coupled for data communications with a high speed, low latency network, the compute nodes are organized for collective operations with each compute node including at least four processing cores. Each processing core is assigned an input buffer. The processing cores include two reduction processing cores dedicated to executing reduction operations, a network write processing core dedicated to writing results of reduction operations to the network, and a network read processing core dedicated to receiving data from the network. Performing a local reduction operation on the parallel computer in accordance with embodiments of the present invention includes copying, in interleaved chunks by the reduction processing cores, contents of the reduction processing cores' input buffers to an interleaved buffer in shared memory; copying, by one of the reduction processing cores, contents of the network write processing core's input buffer to shared memory; copying, by another of the reduction processing cores, contents of the network read processing core's input buffer to shared memory; and locally reducing in parallel by the reduction processing cores: the contents of the reduction processing core's input buffer; every other interleaved chunk of the interleaved buffer; the copied contents of the network write processing core's input buffer; and the copied contents of the network read processing core's input buffer.
The foregoing and other objects, features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the following more particular descriptions of exemplary embodiments of the invention as illustrated in the accompanying drawings wherein like reference numbers generally represent like parts of exemplary embodiments of the invention.
Exemplary methods, apparatus, and products for performing a local reduction operation on a parallel computer in accordance with embodiments of the present invention are described with reference to the accompanying drawings, beginning with
The compute nodes (102) are coupled for data communications by several independent data communications networks including a Joint Test Action Group (‘JTAG’) network (104), a global combining network (106) which is optimized for collective operations, and a torus network (108) which is optimized point to point operations. The global combining network (106) is a data communications network that includes data communications links connected to the compute nodes so as to organize the compute nodes as a tree. Each data communications network is implemented with data communications links among the compute nodes (102). The data communications links provide data communications for parallel operations among the compute nodes of the parallel computer. The links between compute nodes are bi-directional links that are typically implemented using two separate directional data communications paths.
In addition, the compute nodes (102) of parallel computer are organized into at least one operational group (132) of compute nodes for collective parallel operations on parallel computer (100). An operational group of compute nodes is the set of compute nodes upon which a collective parallel operation executes. Collective operations are implemented with data communications among the compute nodes of an operational group. Collective operations are those functions that involve all the compute nodes of an operational group. A collective operation is an operation, a message-passing computer program instruction that is executed simultaneously, that is, at approximately the same time, by all the compute nodes in an operational group of compute nodes. Such an operational group may include all the compute nodes in a parallel computer (100) or a subset all the compute nodes. Collective operations are often built around point to point operations. A collective operation requires that all processes on all compute nodes within an operational group call the same collective operation with matching arguments. A ‘broadcast’ is an example of a collective operation for moving data among compute nodes of an operational group. A ‘reduce’ operation is an example of a collective operation that executes arithmetic or logical functions on data distributed among the compute nodes of an operational group. An operational group may be implemented as, for example, an MPI ‘communicator.’
‘MPI’ refers to ‘Message Passing Interface,’ a prior art parallel communications library, a module of computer program instructions for data communications on parallel computers. Examples of prior-art parallel communications libraries that may be improved for use with systems according to embodiments of the present invention include MPI and the ‘Parallel Virtual Machine’ (‘PVM’) library. PVM was developed by the University of Tennessee, The Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Emory University. MPI is promulgated by the MPI Forum, an open group with representatives from many organizations that define and maintain the MPI standard. MPI at the time of this writing is a de facto standard for communication among compute nodes running a parallel program on a distributed memory parallel computer. This specification sometimes uses MPI terminology for ease of explanation, although the use of MPI as such is not a requirement or limitation of the present invention.
Some collective operations have a single originating or receiving process running on a particular compute node in an operational group. For example, in a ‘broadcast’ collective operation, the process on the compute node that distributes the data to all the other compute nodes is an originating process. In a ‘gather’ operation, for example, the process on the compute node that received all the data from the other compute nodes is a receiving process. The compute node on which such an originating or receiving process runs is referred to as a logical root.
Most collective operations are variations or combinations of four basic operations: broadcast, gather, scatter, and reduce. The interfaces for these collective operations are defined in the MPI standards promulgated by the MPI Forum. Algorithms for executing collective operations, however, are not defined in the MPI standards. In a broadcast operation, all processes specify the same root process, whose buffer contents will be sent. Processes other than the root specify receive buffers. After the operation, all buffers contain the message from the root process.
In a scatter operation, the logical root divides data on the root into segments and distributes a different segment to each compute node in the operational group. In scatter operation, all processes typically specify the same receive count. The send arguments are only significant to the root process, whose buffer actually contains sendcount*N elements of a given data type, where N is the number of processes in the given group of compute nodes. The send buffer is divided and dispersed to all processes (including the process on the logical root). Each compute node is assigned a sequential identifier termed a ‘rank.’ After the operation, the root has sent sendcount data elements to each process in increasing rank order. Rank 0 receives the first sendcount data elements from the send buffer. Rank 1 receives the second sendcount data elements from the send buffer, and so on.
A gather operation is a many-to-one collective operation that is a complete reverse of the description of the scatter operation. That is, a gather is a many-to-one collective operation in which elements of a datatype are gathered from the ranked compute nodes into a receive buffer in a root node.
A reduce operation is also a many-to-one collective operation that includes an arithmetic or logical function performed on two data elements. All processes specify the same ‘count’ and the same arithmetic or logical function. After the reduction, all processes have sent count data elements from computer node send buffers to the root process. In a reduction operation, data elements from corresponding send buffer locations are combined pair-wise by arithmetic or logical operations to yield a single corresponding element in the root process's receive buffer. Application specific reduction operations can be defined at runtime. Parallel communications libraries may support predefined operations. MPI, for example, provides the following pre-defined reduction operations:
In addition to compute nodes, the parallel computer (100) includes input/output (‘I/O’) nodes (110, 114) coupled to compute nodes (102) through the global combining network (106). The compute nodes in the parallel computer (100) are partitioned into processing sets such that each compute node in a processing set is connected for data communications to the same I/O node. Each processing set, therefore, is composed of one I/O node and a subset of compute nodes (102). The ratio between the number of compute nodes to the number of I/O nodes in the entire system typically depends on the hardware configuration for the parallel computer. For example, in some configurations, each processing set may be composed of eight compute nodes and one I/O node. In some other configurations, each processing set may be composed of sixty-four compute nodes and one I/O node. Such example are for explanation only, however, and not for limitation. Each I/O nodes provide I/O services between compute nodes (102) of its processing set and a set of I/O devices. In the example of
The parallel computer (100) of
The system of
The system of
The arrangement of nodes, networks, and I/O devices making up the exemplary system illustrated in
Performing a local reduction operation on a parallel computer according to embodiments of the present invention may be generally implemented on a parallel computer that includes a plurality of compute nodes. In fact, such computers may include thousands of such compute nodes. Each compute node is in turn itself a kind of computer composed of one or more computer processors (or processing cores), its own computer memory, and its own input/output adapters. For further explanation, therefore,
Also stored in RAM (156) is a messaging module (160), a library of computer program instructions that carry out parallel communications among compute nodes, including point to point operations as well as collective operations. Application program (158) executes collective operations by calling software routines in the messaging module (160). A library of parallel communications routines may be developed from scratch for use in systems according to embodiments of the present invention, using a traditional programming language such as the C programming language, and using traditional programming methods to write parallel communications routines that send and receive data among nodes on two independent data communications networks. Alternatively, existing prior art libraries may be improved to operate according to embodiments of the present invention. Examples of prior-art parallel communications libraries include the ‘Message Passing Interface’ (‘MPI’) library and the ‘Parallel Virtual Machine’ (‘PVM’) library.
The messaging module (160), in the example of
Also stored in RAM (156) is an operating system (162), a module of computer program instructions and routines for an application program's access to other resources of the compute node. It is typical for an application program and parallel communications library in a compute node of a parallel computer to run a single thread of execution with no user login and no security issues because the thread is entitled to complete access to all resources of the node. The quantity and complexity of tasks to be performed by an operating system on a compute node in a parallel computer therefore are smaller and less complex than those of an operating system on a serial computer with many threads running simultaneously. In addition, there is no video I/O on the compute node (152) of
The exemplary compute node (152) of
The data communications adapters in the example of
The data communications adapters in the example of
The data communications adapters in the example of
The data communications adapters in the example of
Example compute node (152) includes two arithmetic logic units (‘ALUs’). ALU (166) is a component of each processing core (164), and a separate ALU (170) is dedicated to the exclusive use of Global Combining Network Adapter (188) for use in performing the arithmetic and logical functions of reduction operations. Computer program instructions of a reduction routine in parallel communications library (160) may latch an instruction for an arithmetic or logical function into instruction register (169). When the arithmetic or logical function of a reduction operation is a ‘sum’ or a ‘logical or,’ for example, Global Combining Network Adapter (188) may execute the arithmetic or logical operation by use of ALU (166) in processor (164) or, typically much faster, by use dedicated ALU (170).
The example compute node (152) of
For further explanation,
For further explanation,
For further explanation,
For further explanation,
In the example of
For further explanation,
The method of
The method of
As depicted in
The method of
For further explanation,
The method of
The method of
Upon performing such local reductions, the other compute nodes return to the compute node carrying out the method of
For further explanation,
In the example of
In the example of
Also in the example of
From buffer (218) in shared memory, the interleaved buffer (216) in shared memory, the buffer (220) in shared memory and the reduction cores' (802, 804) input buffers, a local reduction is performed. Reduction core (802) reduces: contents of the reduction processing core's (802) input buffer (210); every other interleaved chunk of the interleaved buffer (216); the copied contents, stored in shared memory (218), of the network write processing core's (806) input buffer (208); and the copied contents in shared memory (220) of the network read processing core's input buffer (214). At the same time, that is, in parallel, reduction core (804) also reduces: contents of the reduction processing core's (802) input buffer (210); every other interleaved chunk of the interleaved buffer (216); the copied contents, stored in shared memory (218), of the network write processing core's (806) input buffer (208); and the copied contents in shared memory (220) of the network read processing core's input buffer (214).
In performing the local reduction, each reduction core (802, 804) reduces every other interleaved chunk of the interleaved buffer (216). In this way, reduction core (802), in performing the local reduction, utilizes an interleaved chunk copied from reduction core's (804) input buffer (212) while reduction core (804) utilizes an interleaved chunk copied from the other reduction core's (802) input buffer (210). By way of example, reduction core (802), in each step of the local reduction, reduces the following four elements of data: one element of the reduction core's (802) input buffer (210), one interleaved chunk representing one element of the other reduction core's (804) input buffer (212), one element of the network write processing core's (806) input buffer (208) and one element of the network read processing cores input buffer (214). Reduction core (804), in each step of the local reduction, reduces the following four elements of data: one element of the reduction core's (804) input buffer (212), one interleaved chunk representing one element of the other reduction core's (802) input buffer (210), one element of the network write processing core's (806) input buffer (208) and one element of the network read processing core's input buffer (214).
The results of the reduction are written, in an interleaved manner, to a buffer (222) accessible by the network write processing core (806). The network write process core (806) writes the results (212) of the local reduction to the network (106) for data processing by other compute nodes.
As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the present invention may be embodied as a system, method or computer program product. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment (including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may all generally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.” Furthermore, aspects of the present invention may take the form of a computer program product embodied in one or more computer readable medium(s) having computer readable program code embodied thereon.
Any combination of one or more computer readable medium(s) may be utilized. The computer readable medium may be a computer readable signal medium or a computer readable storage medium. A computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. More specific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer readable storage medium would include the following: an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. In the context of this document, a computer readable storage medium may be any tangible medium that can contain, or store a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.
A computer readable signal medium may include a propagated data signal with computer readable program code embodied therein, for example, in baseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may take any of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to, electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. A computer readable signal medium may be any computer readable medium that is not a computer readable storage medium and that can communicate, propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.
Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be transmitted using any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless, wireline, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination of the foregoing.
Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of the present invention may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages, including an object oriented programming language such as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and conventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similar programming languages. The program code may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).
Aspects of the present invention are described above with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of the invention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer readable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readable medium produce an article of manufacture including instructions which implement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, other programmable apparatus or other devices to produce a computer implemented process such that the instructions which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide processes for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementations of systems, methods and computer program products according to various embodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in the flowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portion of code, which comprises one or more executable instructions for implementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be noted that, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.
It will be understood from the foregoing description that modifications and changes may be made in various embodiments of the present invention without departing from its true spirit. The descriptions in this specification are for purposes of illustration only and are not to be construed in a limiting sense. The scope of the present invention is limited only by the language of the following claims.
This application is a continuation application of and claims priority from U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/760,020, filed on Apr. 14, 2010.
This invention was made with Government support under Contract No. B554331 awarded by the Department of Energy. The Government has certain rights in this invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4715032 | Nilsson | Dec 1987 | A |
4843540 | Stolfo | Jun 1989 | A |
5105424 | Flaig et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5333279 | Dunning | Jul 1994 | A |
5513371 | Cypher et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5535197 | Cotton | Jul 1996 | A |
5541914 | Krishnamoorthy et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5617538 | Heller | Apr 1997 | A |
5668815 | Gittinger et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5721828 | Frisch | Feb 1998 | A |
5822604 | Ogasawara et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5832215 | Kato et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5864712 | Carmichael et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5878241 | Wilkinson et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5892923 | Yasuda et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5937202 | Crosetto et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5949988 | Feisullin et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5958017 | Scott et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6000024 | Maddox | Dec 1999 | A |
6038651 | VanHuben et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6067609 | Meeker et al. | May 2000 | A |
6076131 | Nugent | Jun 2000 | A |
6108692 | Van Seters et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6212617 | Hardwick | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6272548 | Cotter et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6289424 | Stevens | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6292822 | Hardwick | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6334138 | Kureya | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6480885 | Olivier | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6634301 | Mulinix | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6714552 | Cotter | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6742063 | Hellum et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6754211 | Brown | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6914606 | Amemiya et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6982960 | Lee et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7133359 | Weis | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7263598 | Ambuel | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7284033 | Jhanji | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7352739 | Rangarajan et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7496699 | Pope et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7539989 | Blackmore et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7555566 | Blumrich et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7613134 | Rangarajan et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7664110 | Lovett et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
7673011 | Archer et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7697443 | Archer et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7707366 | Tagawa | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7725329 | Kil et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7739451 | Wiedenman et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7793527 | Shen | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7835378 | Wijnands et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7853639 | Archer et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7856543 | Rhoades et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7948999 | Blocksome et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8332460 | Blocksome et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
20020016901 | Carvey et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020054051 | Ladd | May 2002 | A1 |
20020065984 | Thompson et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020091819 | Melchione et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020144027 | Schmisseur | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030182376 | Smith | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030188054 | Yosimoto et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212877 | Dally et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040034678 | Kuszmaul et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040073590 | Bhanot et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20050094577 | Ashwood-Smith | May 2005 | A1 |
20050165980 | Clayton et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050243711 | Alicherry et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060168359 | Bissessur et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060179181 | Seong | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060277323 | Joublin et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070110063 | Tang et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070174558 | Jia et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070242611 | Archer et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070245122 | Archer et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070288935 | Tannenbaum et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080077366 | Neuse et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080127146 | Liao et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080201603 | Ritz et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080301683 | Archer et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090006662 | Chen et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090019218 | Sinclair et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090064176 | Ohly et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090067334 | Archer et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090154486 | Archer et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090196361 | Chan et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090240838 | Berg et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090292905 | Faraj | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100122268 | Jia | May 2010 | A1 |
20100185718 | Archer et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20110119673 | Bloch et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110153908 | Schaefer et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110179134 | Mayo et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1835414 | Sep 2007 | EP |
2000156039 | Jun 2000 | JP |
2003036681 | Feb 2003 | JP |
2003317487 | Nov 2003 | JP |
Entry |
---|
Matsuda, et al., “Efficient MPI Collective Operations for Clusters in Long-and-Fast Networks” , pp. 1-9, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing, Sep. 2006, IEEE. |
Stolfo, et al., DADO: A Tree-Structured Machine Architecture for Production Systems, AAAI-82 Proceedings, 1982, AAAI (www.aaai.org), pp. 242-246, Columbia University. |
Oh, “An All-Reduce Operation in Star Networks Using All-to-All Broadcast Communication Patterns”, V.S. Sunderam et al. (Eds.): ICCS 2005, LNCS 3514, pp. 419-426, 2005, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005. |
Yuan, et al., “Bandwidth Efficient All-reduce Operation on Tree Topologies”, IEEE IPDPS Workshop on High-Level Parallel Programming Models and Supportive Environments, 2007, pp. 1-8, IEEE. |
Shrimali et al., “Building Packet Buffers Using Interleaved Memories”, High Performance Switching and Routing, 2005. HPSR, May 2005, 5pp. |
Edmonds, “AM++: A Generalized Active Message Framework,”pp. 1-10, Sep. 2010. |
Bangalore. “Extending the Message Passing Interface (MPI)”, Proc. of the 1994 Conf. on Scalable Parallel Libraries, IEEE, pp. 106-118, 1995. |
Bafna, “Coprocessor Design to Support MPI Primitives in Configurable Mutliprocessors;” Integration, the VSLI Journal, vol. 40 , Issue 3 , pp. 235-252, Apr. 2007. |
Keller; “MPI Development Tools and Applications for the Grid,” Jun. 2003, pp. 1-12. |
Tang; “Optimizing threaded MPI execution on SMP clusters,” International Conference on Supercomputer, Jun. 2001, pp. 381-392. |
Sunggu, et al., “Interleaved All-To-All Reliable Broadcast on Meshes and Hypercubes”, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, May 1994, pp. 449-458, vol. 5, No. 5, IEEE Xplore. |
“Depth-first search—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia”, http://web.archive.org/web/20070505212029/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth-first—search, Accessed: Apr. 29, 2009, pp. 1-5. |
Bruck, et al. Efficient Algorithms for All-To-All Communications in Multiport Message-Passing Systems, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 8, Issue: 11, pp. 1143-1156, Nov. 1997, ISSN: 1045-9219. |
Specification of U.S. Appl. No. 60/271,124, filed Feb. 24, 2001, pp. 12-13, 27 and 42-43. |
Sistare, et al., “Optimization of MPI collectives on clusters of large-scale SMP's”, Conference on High Performance Networking and Computing, Proceedings of the 1999 ACM/IEEE Conference on Supercomputing; 1999, pp. 1-18, ACM, New York, USA. |
Tanenbaum, “Structured Computer Organization”, 1984, pp. 1-5, Second Edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., USA, ISBN: 0-13-854489-1. |
Rosenberg, “Dictionary of Computers, Information Processing & Telecommunications”, 1987, pp. 1-5, Second Edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York. |
Herbordt, et al., “Computing Parallel Prefix and Reduction Using Coterie Structures”; Fourth Symposium on the Frontiers of Massively Parallel Computation; 1992, Oct. 19-21, 1992, pp. 141-149, IEEE Xplore. |
Fisher, et al., “Computing the Hough Transform on a Scan Line Array Processor [image processing]”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 11, Issue: 3, Mar. 1989, pp. 262-265, IEEE Xplore. |
Better Explained, “Swap two variables using XOR I BetterExplained”, http://betterexplained.com/articles/swap-two-variables-using-xor, Accessed Jun. 4, 2011, pp. 1-8. |
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/769,367, USPTO Sep. 28, 2010, 14 pp. |
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/053,842, USPTO Oct. 18, 2010, 23 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/053,842, USPTO Mar. 1, 2011, 21 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/754,740, USPTO Apr. 11, 2011, 20 pp. |
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/124,756, USPTO Mar. 28, 2011, 19 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/503,902, Oct. 6, 2010, 09 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/060,492, May 27, 2010, 10 pp. |
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/060,492, Dec. 2, 2010, 10 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/124,763, Oct. 14, 2010, 14 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/124,756, Oct. 18, 2010, 14 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/279,620, Mar. 4, 2008, 14 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/279,620, Sep. 3, 2008, 6 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/279,620, Dec. 29, 2008, 14 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/769,367, Apr. 3, 2009, 11 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/459,387, Dec. 13, 2007, 19 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/459,387, Jul. 11, 2008, 20 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/459,387, Mar. 18, 2009, 25 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/737,286, Feb. 9, 2009, 07 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/737,209, Jul. 20, 2009, 15 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/843,090, Sep. 4, 2009, 13 pp. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/760,020, Feb. 13, 2012, 33 pp. |
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 12/760,020, Jul. 30, 2012, 19 pp. |
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 12/124,763, USPTO Oct. 3, 2012. |
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/124,745, USPTO Nov. 23, 2012. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/748,594, USPTO Sep. 14, 2012. |
Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/585,993, Oct. 11, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/672,740, filed Nov. 9, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/666,221, filed Nov. 1, 2012. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120317399 A1 | Dec 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12760020 | Apr 2010 | US |
Child | 13585993 | US |