skip to main content
10.1145/2481268.2481274acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespldiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Invasive computing in HPC with X10

Published:20 June 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

High performance computing with thousands of cores relies on distributed memory due to memory consistency reasons. The resource management on such systems usually relies on static assignment of resources at the start of each application. Such a static scheduling is incapable of starting applications with required resources being used by others since a reduction of resources assigned to applications without stopping them is not possible. This lack of dynamic adaptive scheduling leads to idling resources until the remaining amount of requested resources gets available. Additionally, applications with changing resource requirements lead to idling or less efficiently used resources. The invasive computing paradigm suggests dynamic resource scheduling and applications able to dynamically adapt to changing resource requirements.

As a case study, we developed an invasive resource manager as well as a multigrid with dynamically changing resource demands. Such a multigrid has changing scalability behavior during its execution and requires data migration upon reallocation due to distributed memory systems.

To counteract the additional complexity introduced by the additional interfaces, e. g. for data migration, we use the X10 programming language for improved programmability. Our results show improved application throughput and the dynamic adaptivity. In addition, we show our extension for the distributed arrays of X10 to support data migration.

References

  1. G. M. Amdahl. Validity of the single processor approach to achieving large scale computing capabilities. In Proceedings of the April 18--20, 1967, spring joint computer conference, AFIPS '67 (Spring), pages 483--485, New York, NY, USA, 1967. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. M. Bader, H.-J. Bungartz, and M. Schreiber. Invasive computing on high performance shared memory systems. In Facing the Multicore-Challenge III, volume 7686 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Sept. 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. S. Borkar and A. A. Chien. The future of microprocessors. Commun. ACM, 54:67--77, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. Braun, S. Buchwald, M. Mohr, and A. Zwinkau. An X10 compiler for invasive architectures. Technical Report 9, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. W. L. Briggs, V. E. Henson, and S. F. McCormick. A Multigrid Tutorial. Society for Industrial Mathematics, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. W. Carlson, J. Draper, D. Culler, K. Yelick, E. Brooks, and K. Warren. Introduction to UPC and Language Specification. 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. J. Dokulil, E. Bajrovic, S. Benkner, S. Pllana, M. Sandrieser, and B. Bachmayer. Efficient Hybrid Execution of C++ Applications using Intel(R) Xeon Phi(TM) Coprocessor. CoRR, abs/1211.5530, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. M. Gerndt, A. Hollmann, M. Meyer, M. Schreiber, and J. Weidendorfer. Invasive computing with iomp. In Specification and Design Languages (FDL), pages 225--231, Sept. 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. F. Hannig, S. Roloff, G. Snelting, J. Teich, and A. Zwinkau. Resource-aware programming and simulation of MPSoC architectures through extension of X10. In Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Software and Compilers for Embedded Systems (SCOPES), pages 48--55. ACM Press, June 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. S. Kobbe, L. Bauer, J. Henkel, D. Lohman, and W. Schröder-Preikschat. DistRM: Distributed resource management for on-chip many-core systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Hardware/Software Codesign and System Synthesis (CODES+ISSS), pages 119--128, Oct. 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. K. Murakami, N. Irie, and S. Tomita. SIMP (Single Instruction Stream/Multiple Instruction Pipelining): A Novel High-speed Single-processor Architecture. SIGARCH Comput. Archit. News, 17(3):78--85, Apr. 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J. Nieplocha, R. Harrison, and R. Littlefield. Global arrays: A nonuniform memory access programming model for high-performance computers. The Journal of Supercomputing, 10:169--189, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. W. Numrich and J. Reid. Co-array fortran for parallel programming. SIGPLAN Fortran Forum, 17(2):1--31, Aug. 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. B. Oechslein, J. Schedel, J. Kleinöder, L. Bauer, J. Henkel, D. Lohmann, and W. Schröder-Preikschat. OctoPOS: A parallel operating system for invasive computing. In R. McIlroy, J. Sventek, T. Harris, and T. Roscoe, editors, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Systems for Future Multi-CoreArchitectures (SFMA), volume USB Proceedings of Sixth International ACM/EuroSys European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys), pages 9--14. EuroSys, Apr. 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. A. Peleg and U. Weiser. MMX Technology Extension to the Intel Architecture. Micro, IEEE, 16(4):42--50, Aug. 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. R. K. Pujari, T. Wild, A. Herkersdorf, B. Vogel, and J. Henkel. Hardware assisted thread assignment for RISC based MPSoCs in invasive computing. In Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Integrated Circuits (ISIC), Dec. 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. V. Saraswat, B. Bloom, I. Peshansky, O. Tardieu, and D. Grove. X10 Language Specification Version 2.3, Oct 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. M. Schreiber, H.-J. Bungartz, and M. Bader. Shared memory parallelization of fully-adaptive simulations using a dynamic tree-split and -join approach. Puna, India, Dec. 2012. IEEE International Conference on High Performance Computing (HiPC), IEEE Xplore.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. J. Speck, P. Sanders, and P. Flick. Malleable sorting. In International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing. IEEE Computer Society, May 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. J. Teich, J. Henkel, A. Herkersdorf, D. Schmitt-Landsiedel, W. Schröder-Preikschat, and G. Snelting. Invasive computing: An overview. In M. Hübner and J. Becker, editors, Multiprocessor System-on-Chip -- Hardware Design and Tool Integration, pages 241--268. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. U. Trottenberg, C. Oosterlee, and A. Schüller. Multigrid. Academic Press, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. A. Zwinkau. Resource awareness for efficiency in high-level programming languages. Technical Report 12, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Invasive computing in HPC with X10

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          X10 '13: Proceedings of the third ACM SIGPLAN X10 Workshop
          June 2013
          47 pages
          ISBN:9781450321570
          DOI:10.1145/2481268

          Copyright © 2013 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 20 June 2013

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          X10 '13 Paper Acceptance Rate5of5submissions,100%Overall Acceptance Rate5of5submissions,100%

          Upcoming Conference

          PLDI '24

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader