GhOST: a GPU Out-of-Order Scheduling Technique for Stall Reduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) use massive multi-threading coupled with static scheduling to hide instruction latencies. Despite this, memory instructions pose a challenge as their latencies vary throughout the application’s execution, leading to stalls. Out-of-order (OoO) execution has been shown to effectively mitigate these types of stalls. However, prior OoO proposals involve costly techniques such as reordering loads and stores, register renaming, or two-phase execution, amplifying implementation overhead and consequently creating a substantial barrier to adoption in GPUs. This paper introduces GhOST, a minimal yet effective OoO technique for GPUs. Without expensive components, GhOST can manifest a substantial portion of the instruction reorderings found in an idealized OoO GPU. GhOST leverages the decode stage’s existing pool of decoded instructions and the existing issue stage’s information about instructions in the pipeline to select instructions for OoO execution with little additional hardware. A comprehensive evaluation of GhOST and the prior state-of-the-art OoO technique across a range of diverse GPU benchmarks yields two surprising insights: (1) Prior works utilized Nvidia’s intermediate representation PTX for evaluation; however, the optimized static instruction scheduling of the final binary form negates many purported improvements from OoO execution; and (2) The prior state-of-the-art OoO technique results in an average slowdown across this set of benchmarks. In contrast, GhOST achieves a $\mathbf{3 6 \%}$ maximum and $6.9 \%$ geometric mean speedup on GPU binaries with only a $0.007 \%$ area increase, surpassing previous techniques without slowing down any of the measured benchmarks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".