LazyPIM: Efficient Support for Cache Coherence in Processing-in-Memory Architectures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Processing-in-memory (PIM) architectures have seen an increase in popularity recently, as the high internal bandwidth available within 3D-stacked memory provides greater incentive to move some computation into the logic layer of the memory. To maintain program correctness, the portions of a program that are executed in memory must remain coherent with the portions of the program that continue to execute within the processor. Unfortunately, PIM architectures cannot use traditional approaches to cache coherence due to the high off-chip traffic consumed by coherence messages, which, as we illustrate in this work, can undo the benefits of PIM execution for many data-intensive applications. We propose LazyPIM, a new hardware cache coherence mechanism designed specifically for PIM. Prior approaches for coherence in PIM are ill-suited to applications that share a large amount of data between the processor and the PIM logic. LazyPIM uses a combination of speculative cache coherence and compressed coherence signatures to greatly reduce the overhead of keeping PIM coherent with the processor, even when a large amount of sharing exists.We find that LazyPIM improves average performance across a range of data-intensive PIM applications by 19.6%, reduces off-chip traffic by 30.9%, and reduces energy consumption by 18.0%, over the best prior approaches to PIM coherence.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".