The design of a digital system for energy efficiency often requires the analysis of circuit tradeoffs in addition to architectural tradeoffs. To assist with this analysis, we present a framework for performing joint exploration of both the architectural and circuit design spaces. In our approach, we use statistical inference techniques to create a model of a large micro-architectural design space from a small number of simulation samples. We then characterize the design tradeoffs of each of the underlying circuits and integrate these with the higher level architectural models to define the joint circuit-architecture design space. We use posynomial forms for all our models, enabling the use of convex optimization tools to efficiently search the joint design space. As an example, we apply this methodology to explore the power-performance tradeoffs in a dual-issue superscalar out-of-order processor, showing how the framework can be used to determine the optimal set of design parameters for energy efficiency. Compared to current architectural tools that use fixed circuit costs, joint optimization can reduce energy by up to 30% by considering circuit tradeoff characteristics.

Power consumption has become a major constraint in the design of processors today. To optimize a processor for energy-efficiency requires an examination of energy-performance trade-offs in all aspects of the processor design space, including both architectural and circuit design choices. In this paper, we apply an integrated architecture-circuit optimization framework to map out energy-performance trade-offs of several different high-level processor architectures. We show how the joint architecture-circuit space provides a trade-off range of approximately 6.5x in performance for 4x energy, and we identify the optimal architectures for different design objectives. We then show that many of the designs in this space come at very high marginal costs. Our results show that, for a large range of design objectives, voltage scaling is effective in efficiently trading off performance and energy, and that the choice of optimal architecture and circuits does not change much during voltage scaling. Finally, we show that with only two designs--a dual-issue in-order design and a dual-issue out-of-order design, both properly optimized-a large part of the energy-performance trade-off space can be covered within 3% of the optimal energy-efficiency.

This paper considers Rigel, a programmable accelerator architecture for a broad class of data- and task-parallel computation. Rigel comprises 1000+ hierarchically-organized cores that use a fine-grained, dynamically scheduled single-program, multiple-data (SPMD) execution model. Rigel's low-level programming interface adopts a single global address space model where parallel work is expressed in a task-centric, bulk-synchronized manner using minimal hardware support. Compared to existing accelerators, which contain domain-specific hardware, specialized memories, and/or restrictive programming models, Rigel is more flexible and provides a straightforward target for a broader set of applications.

Visualization, interaction, and simulation (VIS) constitute a class of applications that is growing in importance. This class includes applications such as graphics rendering, video encoding, simulation, and computer vision. These applications are ideally suited for accelerators because of their parallelizability and demand for high throughput. We compile a benchmark suite, VIS- Bench, to serve as a proxy for this application class. We use VISBench to examine some important high level decisions for an accelerator architecture. We propose a highly parallel base architecture. We examine the need for synchronization and data communication. We also examine GPU-style SIMD execution and find that a MIMD architecture usually performs better. Given these high level choices, we use VISBench to explore the microarchitectural design space. We analyze area versus performance tradeoffs in designing individual cores and the memory hierarchy. We find that a design made of small, simple cores achieves much higher throughput than a general purpose uniprocessor. Further, we find that a limited amount of support for ILP within each core aids overall performance. We find that fine-grained multithreading improves performance, but only up to a point. We find that word-level (SSE-style) SIMD provides a poor performance to area ratio. Finally, we find that sufficient memory and cache bandwidth is essential to performance.

This paper argues for an implicitly parallel programming model for many-core microprocessors, and provides initial technical approaches towards this goal. In an implicitly parallel programming model, programmers maximize algorithm-level parallelism, express their parallel algorithms by asserting high-level properties on top of a traditional sequential programming language, and rely on parallelizing compilers and hardware support to perform parallel execution under the hood. In such a model, compilers and related tools require much more advanced program analysis capabilities and programmer assertions than what are currently available so that a comprehensive understanding of the input program's concurrency can be derived. Such an understanding is then used to drive automatic or interactive parallel code generation tools for a diverse set of parallel hardware organizations. The chip-level architecture and hardware should maintain parallel execution state in such a way that a strictly sequential execution state can always be derived for the purpose of verifying and debugging the program. We argue that implicitly parallel programming models are critical for addressing the software development crises and software scalability challenges for many-core microprocessors.

ACE analysis is a technique to provide an early reliability estimate for microprocessors. ACE analysis couples data from abstract performance models with low level design details to identify and rule out transient faults that will not cause incorrect execution. While many transient faults are analyzable in ACE analysis frameworks, some are not. As a result, ACE analysis is conservative and provides a lower bound for the reliability of a processor design. Bounding the reliability of a design is useful since it can guarantee that the given design will meet reliability goals.