Chap2 GGKK.ppt

Introduction to Parallel Computing, A. Grama, A. Gupta, G. Karypis, and V. Kumar Parts of Chap 2 1
Parallel Computing Platforms
Ananth Grama, Anshul Gupta,
George Karypis, and Vipin Kumar
To accompany the text ``Introduction to Parallel Computing'',
Addison Wesley, 2003.

Topic Overview
• Implicit Parallelism: Trends in Microprocessor
Architectures
• Limitations of Memory System Performance
• Dichotomy of Parallel Computing Platforms
• Communication Model of Parallel Platforms
• Physical Organization of Parallel Platforms
• Communication Costs in Parallel Machines
• Messaging Cost Models and Routing Mechanisms
• Mapping Techniques
• Case Studies

Control Structure of Parallel Programs
• Processing units in parallel computers either operate
under the centralized control of a single control unit or
work independently.
• If there is a single control unit that dispatches the same
instruction to various processors (that work on different
data), the model is referred to as single instruction
stream, multiple data stream (SIMD).
• If each processor has its own control control unit, each
processor can execute different instructions on different
data items. This model is called multiple instruction
stream, multiple data stream (MIMD).

SIMD and MIMD Processors
A typical SIMD architecture (a) and a typical MIMD architecture (b).

SIMD Processors
• Some of the earliest parallel computers such as the
Illiac IV, MPP, DAP, CM-2, and MasPar MP-1 belonged
to this class of machines.
• Variants of this concept have found use in co-processing
units such as the MMX units in Intel processors and DSP
chips such as the Sharc.
• SIMD relies on the regular structure of computations
(such as those in image processing).
• It is often necessary to selectively turn off operations on
certain data items. For this reason, most SIMD
programming paradigms allow for an ``activity mask'',
which determines if a processor should participate in a
computation or not.

Conditional Execution in SIMD Processors
Executing a conditional statement on an SIMD computer with four
processors: (a) the conditional statement; (b) the execution of the
statement in two steps.

MIMD Processors
• In contrast to SIMD processors, MIMD processors can
execute different programs on different processors.
• A variant of this, called single program multiple data
streams (SPMD) executes the same program on
different processors.
• It is easy to see that SPMD and MIMD are closely
related in terms of programming flexibility and underlying
architectural support.
• Examples of such platforms include current generation
Sun Ultra Servers, SGI Origin Servers, multiprocessor
PCs, workstation clusters, and the IBM SP.

SIMD-MIMD Comparison
• SIMD computers require less hardware than MIMD
computers (single control unit).
• However, since SIMD processors are specially designed,
they tend to be expensive and have long design cycles.
• Not all applications are naturally suited to SIMD
processors.
• In contrast, platforms supporting the SPMD paradigm
can be built from inexpensive off-the-shelf components
with relatively little effort in a short amount of time.

Communication Model
of Parallel Platforms
• There are two primary forms of data exchange between
parallel tasks - accessing a shared data space and
exchanging messages.
• Platforms that provide a shared data space are called
shared-address-space machines or multiprocessors.
• Platforms that support messaging are also called
message passing platforms or multicomputers.

Shared-Address-Space Platforms
• Part (or all) of the memory is accessible to all
processors.
• Processors interact by modifying data objects stored in
this shared-address-space.
• If the time taken by a processor to access any memory
word in the system global or local is identical, the
platform is classified as a uniform memory access
(UMA), else, a non-uniform memory access (NUMA)
machine.

NUMA and UMA Shared-Address-Space
Platforms
Typical shared-address-space architectures: (a) Uniform-memory
access shared-address-space computer; (b) Uniform-memory-
access shared-address-space computer with caches and
memories; (c) Non-uniform-memory-access shared-address-space
computer with local memory only.

NUMA and UMA
Shared-Address-Space Platforms
• The distinction between NUMA and UMA platforms is important from
the point of view of algorithm design. NUMA machines require
locality from underlying algorithms for performance.
• Programming these platforms is easier since reads and writes are
implicitly visible to other processors.
• However, read-write data to shared data must be coordinated (this
will be discussed in greater detail when we talk about threads
programming).
• Caches in such machines require coordinated access to multiple
copies. This leads to the cache coherence problem.
• A weaker model of these machines provides an address map, but
not coordinated access. These models are called non cache
coherent shared address space machines.

Message-Passing Platforms
• These platforms comprise of a set of processors and
their own (exclusive) memory.
• Instances of such a view come naturally from clustered
workstations and non-shared-address-space
multicomputers.
• These platforms are programmed using (variants of)
send and receive primitives.
• Libraries such as MPI and PVM provide such primitives.

Message Passing
vs.
Shared Address Space Platforms
• Message passing requires little hardware support, other
than a network.
• Shared address space platforms can easily emulate
message passing. The reverse is more difficult to do (in
an efficient manner).

Physical Organization
of Parallel Platforms
We begin this discussion with an ideal parallel machine
called Parallel Random Access Machine, or PRAM.

Architecture of an
Ideal Parallel Computer
• A natural extension of the Random Access Machine
(RAM) serial architecture is the Parallel Random Access
Machine, or PRAM.
• PRAMs consist of p processors and a global memory of
unbounded size that is uniformly accessible to all
processors.
• Processors share a common clock but may execute
different instructions in each cycle.

Architecture of an
• Depending on how simultaneous memory accesses are
handled, PRAMs can be divided into four subclasses.
– Exclusive-read, exclusive-write (EREW) PRAM.
– Concurrent-read, exclusive-write (CREW) PRAM.
– Exclusive-read, concurrent-write (ERCW) PRAM.
– Concurrent-read, concurrent-write (CRCW) PRAM.

Architecture of an
• What does concurrent write mean, anyway?
– Common: write only if all values are identical.
– Arbitrary: write the data from a randomly selected processor.
– Priority: follow a predetermined priority order.
– Sum: Write the sum of all data items.

Physical Complexity of an
• Processors and memories are connected via switches.
• Since these switches must operate in O(1) time at the
level of words, for a system of p processors and m
words, the switch complexity is O(mp).
• Clearly, for meaningful values of p and m, a true PRAM
is not realizable.

Interconnection Networks
for Parallel Computers
• Interconnection networks carry data between processors
and to memory.
• Interconnects are made of switches and links (wires,
fiber).
• Interconnects are classified as static or dynamic.
• Static networks consist of point-to-point communication
links among processing nodes and are also referred to
as direct networks.
• Dynamic networks are built using switches and
communication links. Dynamic networks are also
referred to as indirect networks.

Static and Dynamic
Classification of interconnection networks: (a) a static
network; and (b) a dynamic network.

• Switches map a fixed number of inputs to outputs.
• The total number of ports on a switch is the degree of
the switch.
• The cost of a switch grows as the square of the degree
of the switch, the peripheral hardware linearly as the
degree, and the packaging costs linearly as the number
of pins.

Interconnection Networks:
Network Interfaces
• Processors talk to the network via a network interface.
• The network interface may hang off the I/O bus or the
memory bus.
• In a physical sense, this distinguishes a cluster from a
tightly coupled multicomputer.
• The relative speeds of the I/O and memory buses impact
the performance of the network.

Network Topologies
• A variety of network topologies have been proposed and
implemented.
• These topologies tradeoff performance for cost.
• Commercial machines often implement hybrids of
multiple topologies for reasons of packaging, cost, and
available components.

Network Topologies: Buses
• Some of the simplest and earliest parallel machines
used buses.
• All processors access a common bus for exchanging
data.
• The distance between any two nodes is O(1) in a bus.
The bus also provides a convenient broadcast media.
• However, the bandwidth of the shared bus is a major
bottleneck.
• Typical bus based machines are limited to dozens of
nodes. Sun Enterprise servers and Intel Pentium based
shared-bus multiprocessors are examples of such
architectures.

Network Topologies: Buses
Bus-based interconnects (a) with no local caches; (b) with local
memory/caches.
Since much of the data accessed by processors is
local to the processor, a local memory can improve the
performance of bus-based machines.

Network Topologies: Crossbars
A completely non-blocking crossbar network connecting p
processors to b memory banks.
A crossbar network uses an p×m grid of switches to
connect p inputs to m outputs in a non-blocking manner.

Network Topologies: Crossbars
• The cost of a crossbar of p processors grows as O(p2).
• This is generally difficult to scale for large values of p.
• Examples of machines that employ crossbars include the
Sun Ultra HPC 10000 and the Fujitsu VPP500.

Network Topologies:
Multistage Networks
• Crossbars have excellent performance scalability but
poor cost scalability.
• Buses have excellent cost scalability, but poor
performance scalability.
• Multistage interconnects strike a compromise between
these extremes.

Network Topologies:
Multistage Networks
The schematic of a typical multistage interconnection network.

Network Topologies: Multistage Omega Network
• One of the most commonly used multistage
interconnects is the Omega network.
• This network consists of log p stages, where p is
the number of inputs/outputs.
• At each stage, input i is connected to output j if:

Network Topologies:
Multistage Omega Network
Each stage of the Omega network implements a perfect
shuffle as follows:
A perfect shuffle interconnection for eight inputs and outputs.

Network Topologies:
• The perfect shuffle patterns are connected using 2×2
switches.
• The switches operate in two modes – crossover or
passthrough.
Two switching configurations of the 2 × 2 switch:
(a) Pass-through; (b) Cross-over.

Network Topologies:
A complete omega network connecting eight inputs and eight outputs.
An omega network has p/2 × log p switching
nodes, and the cost of such a network grows as (p log p).
A complete Omega network with the perfect shuffle
interconnects and switches can now be illustrated:

Network Topologies:
Multistage Omega Network – Routing
• Let s be the binary representation of the source and d be
that of the destination processor.
• The data traverses the link to the first switching node. If
the most significant bits of s and d are the same, then
the data is routed in pass-through mode by the switch
else, it switches to crossover.
• This process is repeated for each of the log p switching
stages.
• Note that this is not a non-blocking switch.

Network Topologies:
Multistage Omega Network – Routing
An example of blocking in omega network: one of the messages
(010 to 111 or 110 to 100) is blocked at link AB.

Network Topologies:
Completely Connected Network
• Each processor is connected to every other processor.
• The number of links in the network scales as O(p2).
• While the performance scales very well, the hardware
complexity is not realizable for large values of p.
• In this sense, these networks are static counterparts of
crossbars.

Network Topologies: Completely Connected and
Star Connected Networks
Example of an 8-node completely connected network.
(a) A completely-connected network of eight nodes;
(b) a star connected network of nine nodes.

Network Topologies:
Star Connected Network
• Every node is connected only to a common node at the
center.
• Distance between any pair of nodes is O(1). However,
the central node becomes a bottleneck.
• In this sense, star connected networks are static
counterparts of buses.

Network Topologies:
Linear Arrays, Meshes, and k-d Meshes
• In a linear array, each node has two neighbors, one to its
left and one to its right. If the nodes at either end are
connected, we refer to it as a 1-D torus or a ring.
• A generalization to 2 dimensions has nodes with 4
neighbors, to the north, south, east, and west.
• A further generalization to d dimensions has nodes with
2d neighbors.
• A special case of a d-dimensional mesh is a hypercube.
Here, d = log p, where p is the total number of nodes.

Network Topologies: Linear Arrays
Linear arrays: (a) with no wraparound links; (b) with
wraparound link.

Network Topologies:
Two- and Three Dimensional Meshes
Two and three dimensional meshes: (a) 2-D mesh with no
wraparound; (b) 2-D mesh with wraparound link (2-D torus); and
(c) a 3-D mesh with no wraparound.

Network Topologies:
Hypercubes and their Construction
Construction of hypercubes from hypercubes of lower
dimension.

Network Topologies:
Properties of Hypercubes
• The distance between any two nodes is at most log p.
• Each node has log p neighbors.
• The distance between two nodes is given by the number
of bit positions at which the two nodes differ.

Network Topologies: Tree-Based Networks
Complete binary tree networks: (a) a static tree network; and (b)
a dynamic tree network.

Network Topologies: Tree Properties
• The distance between any two nodes is no more than
2logp.
• Links higher up the tree potentially carry more traffic than
those at the lower levels.
• For this reason, a variant called a fat-tree, fattens the
links as we go up the tree.
• Trees can be laid out in 2D with no wire crossings. This
is an attractive property of trees.

Network Topologies: Fat Trees
A fat tree network of 16 processing nodes.

Evaluating
Static Interconnection Networks
• Diameter: The distance between the farthest two nodes in the
network. The diameter of a linear array is p − 1, that of a mesh
is 2( − 1), that of a tree and hypercube is log p, and that of a
completely connected network is O(1).
• Bisection Width: The minimum number of wires you must cut
to divide the network into two equal parts. The bisection width
of a linear array and tree is 1, that of a mesh is , that of a
hypercube is p/2 and that of a completely connected network
is p2/4.
• Cost: The number of links or switches (whichever is
asymptotically higher) is a meaningful measure of the cost.
However, a number of other factors, such as the ability to
layout the network, the length of wires, etc., also factor in to
the cost.

Evaluating
Static Interconnection Networks
Network Diameter
Bisection
Width
Arc
Connectivity
Cost
(No. of links)
Completely-connected
Star
Complete binary tree
Linear array
2-D mesh, no wraparound
2-D wraparound mesh
Hypercube
Wraparound k-ary d-cube

Evaluating Dynamic Interconnection Networks
Network Diameter
Bisection
Width
Arc
Connectivity
Cost
(No. of links)
Crossbar
Omega Network
Dynamic Tree

Communication Costs
in Parallel Machines
• Along with idling and contention, communication is a
major overhead in parallel programs.
• The cost of communication is dependent on a variety of
features including the programming model semantics,
the network topology, data handling and routing, and
associated software protocols.

Message Passing Costs in
Parallel Computers
• The total time to transfer a message over a network
comprises of the following:
– Startup time (ts): Time spent at sending and receiving nodes
(executing the routing algorithm, programming routers, etc.).
– Per-hop time (th): This time is a function of number of hops and
includes factors such as switch latencies, network delays, etc.
– Per-word transfer time (tw): This time includes all overheads that
are determined by the length of the message. This includes
bandwidth of links, error checking and correction, etc.

Store-and-Forward Routing
• A message traversing multiple hops is completely
received at an intermediate hop before being
forwarded to the next hop.
• The total communication cost for a message of size m
words to traverse l communication links is
• In most platforms, th is small and the above expression
can be approximated by

Routing Techniques
Passing a message from node P0 to P3 (a) through a store-and-
forward communication network; (b) and (c) extending the concept
to cut-through routing. The shaded regions represent the time that
the message is in transit. The startup time associated with this
message transfer is assumed to be zero.

Packet Routing
• Store-and-forward makes poor use of communication
resources.
• Packet routing breaks messages into packets and
pipelines them through the network.
• Since packets may take different paths, each packet
must carry routing information, error checking,
sequencing, and other related header information.
• The total communication time for packet routing is
approximated by:
• The factor tw accounts for overheads in packet headers.

Cut-Through Routing
• Takes the concept of packet routing to an extreme by
further dividing messages into basic units called flits.
• Since flits are typically small, the header information
must be minimized.
• This is done by forcing all flits to take the same path, in
sequence.
• A tracer message first programs all intermediate routers.
All flits then take the same route.
• Error checks are performed on the entire message, as
opposed to flits.
• No sequence numbers are needed.

Cut-Through Routing
• The total communication time for cut-through routing
is approximated by:
• This is identical to packet routing, however, tw is
typically much smaller.

Simplified Cost Model for Communicating
Messages
• The cost of communicating a message between two
nodes l hops away using cut-through routing is given
by
• In this expression, th is typically smaller than ts and tw.
For this reason, the second term in the RHS does not
show, particularly, when m is large.
• Furthermore, it is often not possible to control routing
and placement of tasks.
• For these reasons, we can approximate the cost of
message transfer by

Simplified Cost Model for Communicating
Messages
• It is important to note that the original expression for
communication time is valid for only uncongested
networks.
• If a link takes multiple messages, the corresponding tw
term must be scaled up by the number of messages.
• Different communication patterns congest different
networks to varying extents.
• It is important to understand and account for this in the
communication time accordingly.

Cost Models for
Shared Address Space Machines
• While the basic messaging cost applies to these
machines as well, a number of other factors make
accurate cost modeling more difficult.
• Memory layout is typically determined by the system.
• Finite cache sizes can result in cache thrashing.
• Overheads associated with invalidate and update
operations are difficult to quantify.
• Spatial locality is difficult to model.
• Prefetching can play a role in reducing the overhead
associated with data access.
• False sharing and contention are difficult to model.

Routing Mechanisms
for Interconnection Networks
• How does one compute the route that a message takes
from source to destination?
– Routing must prevent deadlocks - for this reason, we use
dimension-ordered or e-cube routing.
– Routing must avoid hot-spots - for this reason, two-step routing
is often used. In this case, a message from source s to
destination d is first sent to a randomly chosen intermediate
processor i and then forwarded to destination d.

Routing Mechanisms
for Interconnection Networks
Routing a message from node Ps (010) to node Pd (111) in a three-
dimensional hypercube using E-cube routing.

Mapping Techniques for Graphs
• Often, we need to embed a known communication
pattern into a given interconnection topology.
• We may have an algorithm designed for one network,
which we are porting to another topology.
For these reasons, it is useful to understand mapping
between graphs.

Mapping Techniques for Graphs: Metrics
• When mapping a graph G(V,E) into G’(V’,E’), the
following metrics are important:
• The maximum number of edges mapped onto any edge
in E’ is called the congestion of the mapping.
• The maximum number of links in E’ that any edge in E is
• mapped onto is called the dilation of the mapping.
• The ratio of the number of nodes in the set V’ to that in
set V is called the expansion of the mapping.

Embedding a Linear Array
into a Hypercube
• A linear array (or a ring) composed of 2d nodes (labeled
0 through 2d − 1) can be embedded into a d-dimensional
hypercube by mapping node i of the linear array onto
node
• G(i, d) of the hypercube. The function G(i, x) is defined
as follows:
0

into a Hypercube
The function G is called the binary reflected Gray
code (RGC).
Since adjoining entries (G(i, d) and G(i + 1, d)) differ
from each other at only one bit position, corresponding
processors are mapped to neighbors in a hypercube.
Therefore, the congestion, dilation, and expansion of the
mapping are all 1.

into a Hypercube: Example
(a) A three-bit reflected Gray code ring; and (b) its embedding into a
three-dimensional hypercube.

Embedding a Mesh
into a Hypercube
• A 2r × 2s wraparound mesh can be mapped to a 2r+s-
node hypercube by mapping node (i, j) of the mesh onto
node G(i, r− 1) || G(j, s − 1) of the hypercube (where ||
denotes concatenation of the two Gray codes).

Embedding a Mesh into a Hypercube
(a) A 4 × 4 mesh illustrating the mapping of mesh nodes to the nodes
in a four-dimensional hypercube; and (b) a 2 × 4 mesh embedded into
a three-dimensional hypercube.
Once again, the congestion, dilation, and expansion
of the mapping is 1.

Embedding a Mesh into a Linear Array
• Since a mesh has more edges than a linear array, we
will not have an optimal congestion/dilation mapping.
• We first examine the mapping of a linear array into a
mesh and then invert this mapping.
• This gives us an optimal mapping (in terms of
congestion).

Embedding a Mesh into a Linear Array:
Example
(a) Embedding a 16 node linear array into a 2-D mesh; and (b) the
inverse of the mapping. Solid lines correspond to links in the linear
array and normal lines to links in the mesh.

Embedding a Hypercube into a 2-D Mesh
• Each node subcube of the hypercube is mapped to
a node row of the mesh.
• This is done by inverting the linear-array to hypercube
mapping.
• This can be shown to be an optimal mapping.

Embedding a Hypercube into a 2-D Mesh:
Example
Embedding a hypercube into a 2-D mesh.

Case Studies:
The IBM Blue-Gene Architecture
The hierarchical architecture of Blue Gene.

Case Studies:
The Cray T3E Architecture
Interconnection network of the Cray T3E:
(a) node architecture; (b) network topology.

Case Studies:
The SGI Origin 3000 Architecture
Architecture of the SGI Origin 3000 family of servers.

Case Studies:
The Sun HPC Server Architecture
Architecture of the Sun Enterprise family of servers.

Chap2 GGKK.ppt

More Related Content

Similar to Chap2 GGKK.ppt (20)

More from aminnezarat (16)

Recently uploaded (20)

Chap2 GGKK.ppt