Advertisement

Reducing Reconfiguration Overheads Using Configuration Prefetch, Optimal Reuse, and Optimal Memory Mapping

  • I. HariharanEmail author
  • M. Kannan
Short Communication
  • 16 Downloads

Abstract

Modern embedded systems are packed with dedicated field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) to accelerate the overall system performance. But the main drawback in using FPGA as a reconfigurable system is that a lot of reconfiguration overheads are generated in the reconfiguration process. The reconfiguration overheads are mainly because of the configuration data being fetched from the off-chip memory and also due to the improper management of tasks during execution. This work focusses mainly on the prefetch heuristics, reuse technique, and the available memory hierarchy to provide an efficient management of tasks over the available resources. This short communication proposes a new optimal replacement policy which reduces the overall time and energy reconfiguration overheads for static systems in their subsequent iterations. It is evident from the results that most of the time and energy reconfiguration overheads are eliminated.

Keywords

Reconfiguration overheads Configuration mapping Optimal replacement policy Field-programmable gate array (FPGA) Multimedia application Scheduling 

Abbreviations

HS

High-speed on-chip memory

LE

Low-energy on-chip memory

RU

Reconfigurable unit

CM

Configuration Mapper

L

Last

Info table

Information table

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Tessier R, Burleson W (2001) Reconfigurable computing for digital signal processing: a survey. J VLSI Signal Process Syst Signal Image Video Technol 28(1–2):7–27CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Virtex-5 FPGA configuration user guide, Ug191(v3.10) (2011) Xilinx Inc., San Jose, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ramo EP, Resano J, Mozos D, Catthoor F (2007) Reducing the reconfiguration overhead: a survey of techniques. In: Proceedings of the international conference on ERSA, pp 191–194Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Resano J, Mozos D, Catthoor F (2005) A hybrid prefetch scheduling heuristic to minimize at run-time the reconfiguration overhead of dynamically reconfigurable hardware. In: Proceedings of the conference on design, automation and test in Europe, vol 1. IEEE Computer Society, pp 106–111Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li Z, Hauck S (2002) Configuration prefetching techniques for partial reconfigurable coprocessor with relocation and defragmentation. In: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM/SIGDA tenth international symposium on field-programmable gate arrays. ACM, pp 187–195Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li Z, Compton K, Hauck S (2000) Configuration caching management techniques for reconfigurable computing. In: 2000 IEEE symposium on field-programmable custom computing machines, pp 22–36Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clemente JA, Resano J, González C, Mozos D (2011) A hardware implementation of a run-time scheduler for reconfigurable systems. IEEE Trans Very Large Scale Integr Syst 19(7):1263–1276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Enemali G, Adetomi A, Arslan T (2017). FAReP: fragmentation-aware replacement policy for task reuse on reconfigurable FPGAs. In: 2017 IEEE international parallel and distributed processing symposium workshops (IPDPSW), May 2017, pp 202–206Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clemente JA, Ramo EP, Resano J, Mozos D, Catthoor F (2014) Configuration mapping algorithms to reduce energy and time reconfiguration overheads in reconfigurable systems. IEEE Trans Very Large Scale Integr Syst 22(6):1248–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clemente JA, Gran R, Chocano A, del Prado C, Resano J (2016) Hardware architectural support for caching partitioned reconfigurations in reconfigurable systems. IEEE Trans Very Large Scale Integr Syst 24(2):530–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hariharan I, Kannan M (2018) Reducing reconfiguration overheads of a reconfigurable dynamic system using active run-time prediction. J Electr Eng 18(2):349–356Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yoosefi A, Naji HR (2017) A clustering algorithm for communication-aware scheduling of task graphs on multi-core reconfigurable systems. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 10:2718–2732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanemitsu H, Hanada M, Nakazato H (2016) Clustering-based task scheduling in a large number of heterogeneous processors. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 27(11):3144–3157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morales-Villanueva A, Kumar R, Gordon-Ross A (2016). Configuration prefetching and reuse for preemptive hardware multitasking on partially reconfigurable FPGAs. In: Proceedings of the 2016 conference on design, automation and test in Europe. EDA consortium, March 2016, pp 1505–1508Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    7 Series FPGAs Overview, DS180 (v1. 11) (2012) Xilinx, San Jose, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    ZC702 Evaluation Board for the Zynq-7000 XC7Z020 Extensible Processing Platform, User Guide, UG850 (v1. 0) (2012) Xilinx, San Jose, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Altera (2011) Stratix V Device Datasheet, San Jose, CA, USA (online). http://www.altera.com/literature/hb/stratix-v/stx5_53001.pdf
  18. 18.
    Altera (2011) Quartus II Handbook Version 13.0, vol 1: design and synthesis, San Jose, CA, USA (online). http://www.altera.com/literature/hb/qts/quartusii_handbook.pdf
  19. 19.
    AXI Reference guide, UG761 (v13. 1) (2011) Xilinx, San Jose, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Local Memory Bus (LMB) v1. 0 (v1. 00a) (2005) Xilinx, San Jose, CA, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The National Academy of Sciences, India 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electronics Engineering, MIT CampusAnna UniversityChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations