Datacenter transports aim to deliver low latency messaging together with high throughput. We show that simple packet delay, measured as round-trip times at hosts, is an effective congestion signal without the need for switch feedback. First, we show that advances in NIC hardware have made RTT measurement possible with microsecond accuracy, and that these RTTs are sufficient to estimate switch queueing. Then we describe how TIMELY can adjust transmission rates using RTT gradients to keep packet latency low while delivering high bandwidth. We implement our design in host software running over NICs with OS-bypass capabilities. We show using experiments with up to hundreds of machines on a Clos network topology that it provides excellent performance: turning on TIMELY for OS-bypass messaging over a fabric with PFC lowers 99 percentile tail latency by 9X while maintaining near line-rate throughput. Our system also outperforms DCTCP running in an optimized kernel, reducing tail latency by $13$X. To the best of our knowledge, TIMELY is the first delay-based congestion control protocol for use in the datacenter, and it achieves its results despite having an order of magnitude fewer RTT signals (due to NIC offload) than earlier delay-based schemes such as Vegas.

RISC versus CISC wars raged in the 1980s when chip area and processor design complexity were the primary constraints and desktops and servers exclusively dominated the computing landscape. Today, energy and power are the primary design constraints and the computing landscape is significantly different: Growth in tablets and smartphones running ARM (a RISC ISA) is surpassing that of desktops and laptops running x86 (a CISC ISA). Furthermore, the traditionally low-power ARM ISA is entering the high-performance server market, while the traditionally high-performance x86 ISA is entering the mobile low-power device market. Thus, the question of whether ISA plays an intrinsic role in performance or energy efficiency is becoming important again, and we seek to answer this question through a detailed measurement-based study on real hardware running real applications. We analyze measurements on seven platforms spanning three ISAs (MIPS, ARM, and x86) over workloads spanning mobile, desktop, and server computing. Our methodical investigation demonstrates the role of ISA in modern microprocessors’ performance and energy efficiency. We find that ARM, MIPS, and x86 processors are simply engineering design points optimized for different levels of performance, and there is nothing fundamentally more energy efficient in one ISA class or the other. The ISA being RISC or CISC seems irrelevant.

RISC vs. CISC wars raged in the 1980s when chip area and processor design complexity were the primary constraints and desktops and servers exclusively dominated the computing landscape. Today, energy and power are the primary design constraints and the computing landscape is significantly different: growth in tablets and smartphones running ARM (a RISC ISA) is surpassing that of desktops and laptops running x86 (a CISC ISA). Further, the traditionally low-power ARM ISA is entering the high-performance server market, while the traditionally high-performance x86 ISA is entering the mobile low-power device market. Thus, the question of whether ISA plays an intrinsic role in performance or energy efficiency is becoming important, and we seek to answer this question through a detailed measurement based study on real hardware running real applications. We analyze measurements on the ARM Cortex-A8 and Cortex-A9 and Intel Atom and Sandybridge i7 microprocessors over workloads spanning mobile, desktop, and server computing. Our methodical investigation demonstrates the role of ISA in modern microprocessors' performance and energy efficiency. We find that ARM and x86 processors are simply engineering design points optimized for different levels of performance, and there is nothing fundamentally more energy efficient in one ISA class or the other. The ISA being RISC or CISC seems irrelevant.

Since 2004, processor designers have increased core counts to exploit Moore’s Law scaling, rather than focusing on single-core performance. The failure of Dennard scaling, to which the shift to multicore parts is partially a response, may soon limit multicore scaling just as single-core scaling has been curtailed. This paper models multicore scaling limits by combining device scaling, single-core scaling, and multicore scaling to measure the speedup potential for a set of parallel workloads for the next five technology generations. For device scaling, we use both the ITRS projections and a set of more conservative device scaling parameters. To model single-core scaling, we combine measurements from over 150 processors to derive Pareto-optimal frontiers for area/performance and power/performance. Finally, to model multicore scaling, we build a detailed performance model of upper-bound performance and lower-bound core power. The multicore designs we study include single-threaded CPU-like and massively threaded GPU-like multicore chip organizations with symmetric, asymmetric, dynamic, and composed topologies. The study shows that regardless of chip organization and topology, multicore scaling is power limited to a degree not widely appreciated by the computing community. Even at 22 nm (just one year from now), 21% of a fixed-size chip must be powered off, and at 8 nm, this number grows to more than 50%. Through 2024, only 7.9× average speedup is possible across commonly used parallel workloads for the topologies we study, leaving a nearly 24-fold gap from a target of doubled performance per generation.

Since 2005, processor designers have increased core counts to exploit Moore’s Law scaling, rather than focusing on single-core performance. The failure of Dennard scaling, to which the shift to multicore parts is partially a response, may soon limit multicore scaling just as single-core scaling has been curtailed. This paper models multicore scaling limits by combining device scaling, single-core scaling, and multicore scaling to measure the speedup potential for a set of parallel workloads for the next five technology generations. For device scaling, we use both the ITRS projections and a set of more conservative device scaling parameters. To model singlecore scaling, we combine measurements from over 150 processors to derive Pareto-optimal frontiers for area/performance and power/performance. Finally, to model multicore scaling, we build a detailed performance model of upper-bound performance and lowerbound core power. The multicore designs we study include singlethreaded CPU-like and massively threaded GPU-like multicore chip organizations with symmetric, asymmetric, dynamic, and composed topologies. The study shows that regardless of chip organization and topology, multicore scaling is power limited to a degree not widely appreciated by the computing community. Even at 22 nm (just one year from now), 21 % of a fixed-size chip must be powered off, and at 8 nm, this number grows to more than 50%. Through 2024, only 7.9 × average speedup is possible across commonly used parallel workloads, leaving a nearly 24-fold gap from a target of doubled performance per generation.

Software defined radios, which provide a programmable solution for implementing the physical layer processing of multiple communication standards, are widely recognized as one of the most important new technologies for wireless communication systems. Emerging communication standards, however, require tremendous processing capabilities to perform high-bandwidth physical-layer processing in real time. In this paper, we present instruction set extensions for several important communication algorithms including convolutional encoding, Viterbi decoding, turbo decoding, and Reed-Solomon encoding and decoding. The performance benefits of these extensions are evaluated using a supercomputer class vectorizing compiler and the Sandblaster low-power multithreaded processor for software defined radio. The proposed instruction set extensions provide significant performance improvements, while maintaining a high degree of programmability.