Advertisement

Variability-Aware Frequency Scaling in Multi-Clock Processors

  • Sebastian Herbert
  • Diana Marculescu
Part of the Series on Integrated Circuits and Systems book series (ICIR)

Introduction

Variability is becoming a key concern for microarchitects as technology scaling continues and more and more increasingly ill-defined transistors are placed on each die. Process variations during fabrication result in a nonuniformity of transistor delays across a single die, which is then compounded by dynamic thermally dependent delay variation at runtime.

The delay of every critical path in a synchronously timed block must be less than the proposed cycle time for the block as a whole to meet that timing constraint. Thus, as both the amount of variation (due to ever-shrinking feature sizes as well as greater temperature gradients) and the number of critical paths (due to increasing design complexity and levels of integration) grow, the reduction in clock speed necessary to reduce the probability of a timing violation to an acceptably small level increases. However, the worst-case delay is very rarely exercised, and as a result, the overdesign that is necessary to deal with...

References

  1. [1]
    A. Alameldeen and D. Wood, “Variability in Architectural Simulations of Multi-threaded Workloads”, HPCA’03: Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture, 2003, pp. 7–18Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    K. Bowman, S. Duvall and J. Meindl, “Impact of Die-to-die and Within-die Parameter Fluctuations on the Maximum Clock Frequency Distribution for Gigascale Integration”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, February 2002, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 183–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    K. Bowman, S. Samaan and N. Hakim, “Maximum Clock Frequency Distribution with Practical VLSI Design Considerations”, ICICDT’04: Proceedings of the International Conference on Integrated Circuit Design and Technology, 2004, pp. 183–191Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    D. Brooks, V. Tiwari and M. Martonosi, “Wattch: A Framework for Architectural-level Power Analysis and Optimizations”, ISCA’00: Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Computer Architecture, 2000, pp. 83–94Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. Butts and G. Sohi, “A Static Power Model for Architects”, MICRO 33: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Microarchitecture, 2000, pp. 191–201Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    T. Chelcea and S. Nowick, “Robust Interfaces for Mixed Systems with Application to Latency-insensitive Protocols”, DAC’01: Proceedings of the 38th annual Design Automation Conference, 2001, pp. 21–26Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    S. Herbert, S. Garg and D. Marculescu, “Reclaiming Performance and Energy Efficiency from Variability”, PAC2'06: Proceedings of the 3rd Watson Conference on Interaction Between Architecture, Circuits, and Compilers, 2006Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    H. Hua, C. Mineo, K. Schoenfliess, A. Sule, S. Melamed and W. Davis, “Performance Trend in Three-dimensional Integrated Circuits”, IITC'06: Proceedings of the 2006 International Interconnect Technology Conference, 2006, pp. 45–47Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    E. Humenay, D. Tarjan and K. Skadron, “Impact of Parameter Variations on Multi-core Chips”, ASGI’06: Proceedings of the 2006 Workshop on Architectural Support for Gigascale Integration, 2006Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    A. Iyer and D. Marculescu, “Power and Performance Evaluation of Globally Asynchronous Locally Synchronous Processors”, ISCA’02: Proceedings of the 29th International Symposium on Computer Architecture, 2002, pp. 158–168Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    X. Liang and D. Brooks, “Mitigating the Impact of Process Variations on Processor Register Files and Execution Units”, MICRO 39: Proceedings of the 39th Annual ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Microarchitecture, 2006, pp. 504–514Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    D. Marculescu and E. Talpes, “Variability and Energy Awareness: A Microarchitecture-level Perspective”, DAC’05: Proceedings of the 42nd annual Design Automation Conference, 2005, pp. 11–16Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    M. Orshansky, C. Spanos and C. Hu, “Circuit Performance Variability Decomposition”, IWSM’99: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Statistical Metrology, 1999, pp. 10–13Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    G. Semeraro, G. Magklis, R. Balasubramonian, D. Albonesi, S. Dwarkadas and M. Scott, “Energy-efficient Processor Design Using Multiple Clock Domains with Dynamic Voltage and Frequency Scaling”, HPCA’02: Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture, 2002, pp. 29–42Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    K. Skadron, M. Stan, W. Huang, S. Velusamy, K. Sankaranarayanan and D. Tarjan, “Temperature-aware Microarchitecture”, ISCA’03: Proceedings of the 30th International Symposium on Computer Architecture, 2003, pp. 2–13Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Q. Wu, P. Juang, M. Martonosi and W. Clark, “Formal Online Methods for Voltage/Frequency Control in Multiple Clock Domain Microprocessors”, ASPLOS-XI: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, 2004, pp. 248–259Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    W. Zhao and Y. Cao, “New Generation of Predictive Technology Model for Sub-45 nm Design Exploration”, ISQED’06: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Quality Electronic Design, 2006, pp. 585–590Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastian Herbert
    • 1
  • Diana Marculescu
    • 1
  1. 1.Carnegie Mellon UniversityCarnegie Mellon

Personalised recommendations