Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

Flexible instruction scheduling is essential for performance in out-of-order processors. This is typically achieved by using CAM-based Instruction Queues (IQs) that provide complete flexibility in choosing ready instructions for execution, but at the cost of significant scheduling energy.

In this work we seek to reduce the instruction scheduling energy by reducing the depth and width of the IQ. We do so by classifying instructions based on their readiness and criticality, and using this information to bypass the IQ for instructions that will not benefit from its expensive scheduling structures and delay instructions that will not harm performance. Combined, these approaches allow us to offload a significant portion of the instructions from the IQ to much cheaper FIFO-based scheduling structures without hurting performance. As a result we can reduce the IQ depth and width by half, thereby saving energy.

Our design, Delay and Bypass (DNB), is the first design to explicitly address both readiness and criticality to reduce scheduling energy. By handling both classes we are able to achieve 95% of the baseline out-of-order performance while only using 33% of the scheduling energy. This represents a significant improvement over previous designs which addressed only criticality or readiness (91%/89% performance at 74%/53% energy).

Out-of-order execution is one of the main micro-architectural techniques used to improve the performance of both single- and multi-threaded processors. The application of such a processor varies from mobile devices to server computers. This technique achieves higher performance by finding independent instructions and hiding execution latency and uses the cycles which otherwise would be wasted or caused a CPU stall. To accomplish this, it uses scheduling resources including the ROB, IQ, LSQ and physical registers, to store and prioritize instructions.

The pipeline of an out-of-order processor has three macro-stages: the front-end, the scheduler, and the back-end. The front-end fetches instructions, places them in the out-of-order resources, and analyzes them to prepare for their execution. The scheduler identifies which instructions are ready for execution and prioritizes them for scheduling. The back-end updates the processor state with the results of the oldest completed instructions, deallocates the resources and commits the instructions in the program order to maintain correct execution.

Since out-of-order execution needs to be able to choose any available instructions for execution, its scheduling resources must have complex circuits for identifying and prioritizing instructions, which makes them very expansive, therefore, limited. Due to their cost, the scheduling resources are constrained in size. This limited size leads to two stall points respectively at the front-end and the back-end of the pipeline. The front-end can stall due to fully allocated resources and therefore no more new instructions can be placed in the scheduler. The back-end can stall due to the unfinished execution of an instruction at the head of the ROB which prevents other resources from being deallocated, preventing new instructions from being inserted into the pipeline.

To address these two stalls, this thesis focuses on reducing the time instructions occupy the scheduling resources. Our front-end technique tackles IQ pressure while our back-end approach considers the rest of the resources. To reduce front-end stalls we reduce the pressure on the IQ for both storing (depth) and issuing (width) instructions by bypassing them to cheaper storage structures. To reduce back-end stalls, we explore how we can retire instructions earlier, and out-of-order, to reduce the pressure on the out-of-order resource.

The number of instructions a processor's instruction queue can examine (depth) and the number it can issue together (width) determine its ability to take advantage of the ILP in an application. Unfortunately, increasing either the width or depth of the instruction queue is very costly due to the content-addressable logic needed to wakeup and select instructions out-of-order. This work makes the observation that a large number of instructions have both operands ready at dispatch, and therefore do not benefit from out-of-order scheduling. We leverage this to place such ready-at-dispatch instructions in separate, simpler, in-order FIFO queues for scheduling. With such additional queues, we can reduce the size and width of the expensive out-of-order instruction queue, without reducing the processor's overall issue width and depth. Our design, FIFOrder, is able to steer more than 60% of instructions to the cheaper FIFO queues, providing a 50% energy savings over a traditional out-of-order instruction queue design, while delivering 8% higher performance.

Exploiting memory level parallelism (MLP) is crucial to hide long memory and last level cache access latencies. While out-of-order (OoO) cores, and techniques building on them, are effective at exploiting MLP, they deliver poor energy efficiency due to their complex hardware and the resulting energy overheads. As energy efficiency becomes the prime design constraint, we investigate low complexity/energy mechanisms to exploit MLP. This work revisits slice-out-of-order (sOoO) cores as an energy efficient alternative to OoO cores for MLP exploitation. These cores construct slices of MLP generating instructions and execute them out-of-order with respect to the rest of instructions. However, the slices and the remaining instructions, by themselves, execute in-order. Though their energy overhead is low compared to full OoO cores, sOoO cores fall considerably behind in terms of MLP extraction. We observe that their dependence-oblivious inorder slice execution causes dependent slices to frequently block MLP generation. To boost MLP generation in sOoO cores, we introduce Freeway, a sOoO core based on a new dependence-aware slice execution policy that tracks dependent slices and keeps them out of the way of MLP extraction. The proposed core incurs minimal area and power overheads, yet approaches the MLP benefits of fully OoO cores. Our evaluation shows that Freeway outperforms the state-of-the-art sOoO core by 12% and is within 7% of the MLP limits of full OoO execution.

Speculative execution is necessary for achieving high performance on modern general-purpose CPUs but, starting with Spectre and Meltdown, it has also been proven to cause severe security flaws. In case of a misspeculation, the architectural state is restored to assure functional correctness but a multitude of microarchitectural changes (e.g., cache updates), caused by the speculatively executed instructions, are commonly left in the system.  These changes can be used to leak sensitive information, which has led to a frantic search for solutions that can eliminate such security flaws. The contribution of this work is an evaluation of the cost of hiding speculative side-effects in the cache hierarchy, making them visible only after the speculation has been resolved. For this, we compare (for the first time) two broad approaches: i) waiting for loads to become non-speculative before issuing them to the memory system, and ii) eliminating the side-effects of speculation, a solution consisting of invisible loads (Ghost loads) and performance optimizations (Ghost Buffer and Materialization). While previous work, InvisiSpec, has proposed a similar solution to our latter approach, it has done so with only a minimal evaluation and at a significant performance cost. The detailed evaluation of our solutions shows that: i) waiting for loads to become non-speculative is no more costly than the previously proposed InvisiSpec solution, albeit much simpler, non-invasive in the memory system, and stronger security-wise; ii) hiding speculation with Ghost loads (in the context of a relaxed memory model) can be achieved at the cost of 12% performance degradation and 9% energy increase, which is significantly better that the previous state-of-the-art solution.

Out-of-order execution is essential for high performance, general-purpose computation, as it can find and execute useful work instead of stalling. However, it is typically limited by the requirement of visibly sequential, atomic instruction executionin other words, in-order instruction commit. While in-order commit has a number of advantages, such as providing precise interrupts and avoiding complications with the memory consistency model, it requires the core to hold on to resources (reorder buffer entries, load/store queue entries, physical registers) until they are released in program order. In contrast, out-of-order commit can release some resources much earlier, yielding improved performance and/or lower resource requirements. Non-speculative out-of-order commit is limited in terms of correctness by the conditions described in the work of Bell and Lipasti (2004). In this paper we revisit out-of-order commit by examining the potential performance benefits of lifting these conditions one by one and in combination, for both non-speculative and speculative out-of-order commit. While correctly handling recovery for all out-of-order commit conditions currently requires complex tracking and expensive checkpointing, this work aims to demonstrate the potential for selective, speculative out-of-order commit using an oracle implementation without speculative rollback costs. Through this analysis of the potential of out-of-order commit, we learn that: a) there is significant untapped potential for aggressive variants of out-of-order commit; b) it is important to optimize the out-of-order commit depth for a balanced design, as smaller cores benefit from reduced depth while larger cores continue to benefit from deeper designs; c) the focus on implementing only a subset of the out-of-order commit conditions could lead to efficient implementations; d) the benefits of out-of-order commit increases with higher memory latency and in conjunction with prefetching; e) out-of-order commit exposes additional parallelism in the memory hierarchy.

Weak memory models are a consequence of the desire on part of architects to preserve all the uniprocessor optimizations while building a shared memory multiprocessor. The efforts to formalize weak memory models of ARM and POWER over the last decades are mostly empirical - they try to capture empirically observed behaviors - and end up providing no insight into the inherent nature of weak memory models. This paper takes a constructive approach to find a common base for weak memory models: we explore what a weak memory would look like if we constructed it with the explicit goal of preserving all the uniprocessor optimizations. We will disallow some optimizations which break a programmer's intuition in highly unexpected ways. The constructed model, which we call General Atomic Memory Model (GAM), allows all four load/store reorderings. We give the construction procedure of GAM, and provide insights which are used to define its operational and axiomatic semantics. Though no attempt is made to match GAM to any existing weak memory model, we show by simulation that GAM has comparable performance with other models. No deep knowledge of memory models is needed to read this paper.

Load reordering is important for performance. It allows a core to continue performing accesses to the memory system even when there are older, in-program-order, unperformed accesses (for example, due to long latency misses). The only known solution to allow such reordering in a strong consistency model such as total store ordering (TSO) has been to reorder speculatively and squash-and-re-execute if caught. We show, for the first time, that we can do the load reordering non-speculatively and leave it to the coherence protocol to handle conflicts. We can do this efficiently (without perceptible hardware or performance cost) and without deadlocks or livelocks. The important new result is that we can now irrevocably bind speculative loads. Our solution allows us to commit reordered loads out of order without having to wait (for the loads to become non-speculative) or checkpoint committed state (and rollback if needed), just to ensure correctness in the rare case of another core seeing the reordering.

While in-order instruction commit has its advantages, such as providing precise interrupts and avoiding complications with the memory consistency model, it requires the core to hold on to resources (reorder buffer entries, load/store queue entries, registers) until they are released in program order. In contrast, out-of-order commit releases resources much earlier, yielding improved performance without the need for additional hardware resources. In this paper, we revisit out-of-order commit from a different perspective, not by proposing another hardware technique, but by introducing a taxonomy and evaluating three different micro-architectures that have this technique enabled. We show how smaller processors can benefit from simple out-oforder commit strategies, but that larger, aggressive cores require more aggressive strategies to improve performance.

Out-of-order execution is essential for high performance, general-purpose computation, as it can find and execute useful work instead of stalling. However, it is limited by the requirement of visibly sequential, atomic instruction execution --- in other words in-order instruction commit. While in-order commit has its advantages, such as providing precise interrupts and avoiding complications with the memory consistency model, it requires the core to hold on to resources (reorder buffer entries, load/store queue entries, registers) until they are released in program order. In contrast, out-of-order commit releases resources much earlier, yielding improved performance with fewer traditional hardware resources. However, out-of-order commit is limited in terms of correctness by the conditions described in the work of Bell and Lipasti. In this paper we revisit out-of-order commit from a different perspective, not by proposing another hardware technique, but by examining these conditions one by one and in combination with respect to their potential performance benefit for both non-speculative and speculative out-of-order commit. While correctly handling recovery for all out-of-order commit conditions currently requires complex tracking and expensive checkpointing, this work aims to demonstrate the potential for selective, speculative out-of-order commit using an oracle implementation without speculative rollback costs. We learn that: a) there is significant untapped potential for aggressive variants of out-of-order commit; b) it is important to optimize the commit depth, or the search distance for out-of-order commit, for a balanced design: smaller cores can benefit from shorter depths while larger cores continue to benefit from aggressive parameters; c) the focus on a subset of out-of-order commit conditions could lead to efficient implementations; d) the benefits for out-of-order commit increase with higher memory latency and works well in conjunction with prefetching to continue to improve performance.