SynCron: Efficient Synchronization Support for Near-Data-Processing Architectures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Near-Data-Processing (NDP) architectures present a promising way to alleviate data movement costs and can provide significant performance and energy benefits to parallel applications. Typically, NDP architectures support several NDP units, each including multiple simple cores placed close to memory. To fully leverage the benefits of NDP and achieve high performance for parallel workloads, efficient synchronization among the NDP cores of a system is necessary. However, supporting synchronization in many NDP systems is challenging because they lack shared caches and hardware cache coherence support, which are commonly used for synchronization in multicore systems, and communication across different NDP units can be expensive. This paper comprehensively examines the synchronization problem in NDP systems, and proposes SynCron, an end-to-end synchronization solution for NDP systems. SynCron adds low-cost hardware support near memory for synchronization acceleration, and avoids the need for hardware cache coherence support. SynCron has three components: 1) a specialized cache memory structure to avoid memory accesses for synchronization and minimize latency overheads, 2) a hierarchical message-passing communication protocol to minimize expensive communication across NDP units of the system, and 3) a hardware-only overflow management scheme to avoid performance degradation when hardware resources for synchronization tracking are exceeded. We evaluate SynCron using a variety of parallel workloads, covering various contention scenarios. SynCron improves performance by 1.27× on average (up to 1.78×) under high-contention scenarios, and by 1.35× on average (up to 2.29×) under low-contention real applications, compared to state-of-the-art approaches. SynCron reduces system energy consumption by 2.08× on average (up to 4.25×).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".