MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068573906 · doi:10.1109/fccm.2013.36

A Multithreaded VLIW Soft Processor Family

2013· article· en· W2068573906 on OpenAlexaff
Kalin Ovtcharov, Ilian Tili, J. Gregory Steffan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDatapathField-programmable gate arrayPipeline (software)CompilerVery long instruction wordParallel computingThroughputComputer architectureAdderEmbedded systemSimple (philosophy)ANSI CStratixComputer hardwareProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary form only given. There is growing commercial interest in using FPGAs for compute acceleration. To ease the programming task for non-hardware-expert programmers, systems are emerging that can map high-level languages such as C and OpenCL to FPGAs-targeting compiler-generated circuits and soft processing engines. Soft processing engines such as CPUs are familiar to programmers, can be reprogrammed quickly without rebuilding the FPGA image, and by their general nature can support multiple software functions in a smaller area than the alternative of multiple per-function synthesized circuits. Finally, compelling processing engines can be incorporated into the output of high-level synthesis systems. For FPGA-based soft compute engines to be compelling they must be computationally dense: they must achieve high throughput per area. For simple CPUs with simple functional units (FUs) it is relatively straightforward to achieve good utilization, and it is not overly-detrimental if a small, single-pipeline-stage FU such as an integer adder is under-utilized. In contrast, larger, more deeply pipelined, more numerous, and more varied FUs can be quite challenging to keep busy-even for an engine capable of extracting instruction-level parallelism (ILP) from an application. Hence a key challenge for FPGA-based compute engines is how to maximize compute density (throughput per-area) by achieving high utilization of a datapath composed of multiple varying FUs of significant and varying pipeline depth. In this work, we propose a highly-parameterizable template architecture of a multi-threaded FPGA-based compute engine designed to highly-utilize varied and deeply pipelined FUs. Our approach to achieving high utilization is to leverage (i) support for multiple thread contexts (ii) thread-level and instruction-level parallelism, and (iii) static compiler analysis and scheduling. We focus on deeply-pipelined, IEEE-754 floating-point FUs of widely-varying latency, executing both Hodgkin-Huxley neuron simulation and Black-Scholes options pricing models as example applications, compiled with our LLVM-based scheduler. Targeting a Stratix IV FPGA, we explore architectural tradeoffs by measuring area and throughput for designs with varying numbers of FUs, thread contexts (T), memory banks (B), and bank multi-porting. To determine the most efficient designs that would be suitable for replicating we measure compute density (application throughput per unit of FPGA area), and report which architectural choices lead to the most computationally-dense designs.The most computationally dense design is not necessarily the one with highest throughput and (i) for maximizing throughput, having each thread reside in its own bank is best; (ii) when only moderate numbers of independent threads are available, the compute engine has higher compute density than a custom hardware implementation eg., 2.3x for 32 threads; (iii) the best FU mix does not necessarily match the FU usage in the dataflow graph of the application; and (iv) architectural parameters.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207