of 6

Monitoring Services for Networks-on-Chips

Published on June 2016 | Categories: Types, Research, Internet & Technology | Downloads: 33 | Comments: 0
109 views

Journal of Computing, Volume 4 Issue 7 July 2012, eISSN 2151-9617, http://www.journalofcomputing.org/

Comments

Content

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 7, JULY 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617 https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

102

Monitoring Services for Networks-on-Chips
Reza Kourdy Department of Computer Engineering Islamic Azad University, Khorramabad Branch, Iran Mohammad Reza Nouri rad Department of Computer Engineering Islamic Azad University, Khorramabad Branch, Iran

Abstract— Network monitoring is the process of extracting information regarding the operation of a network for purposes that range from management functions to debugging and diagnostics. Originally started in bus-based systems for the most basic and critical purpose of debugging, monitoring consisted of probes that could relay bus transactions to an external observer (be it a human or a circuit). The observability is crucial for debugging so that the behavior of the system is recorded and can be analyzed, either on- or off-line. When the behavior is recorded into a trace, the run-time evolution of the system can be replayed, facilitating the debugging process. Robustness in time or life-critical applications also requires monitoring of the system and real-time reaction upon false or misbehaving operation. Index Terms—Network on Chip (NOC), Monitoring, Verification and Debugging, NoC Monitoring.

——————————

——————————

1 INTRODUCTION

N

etwork monitoring is the process of extracting information regarding the operation of a network for purposes that range from management functions to debugging and diagnostics. Originally started in busbased systems for the most basic and critical purpose of debugging, monitoring consisted of probes that could relay bus transactions to an external observer (be it a human or a circuit). The observability is crucial for debugging so that the behavior of the system is recorded and can be analyzed, either on- or off-line. When the behavior is recorded into a trace, the run-time evolution of the system can be replayed, facilitating the debugging process. Robustness in time or life-critical applications also requires monitoring of the system and real-time reaction upon false or misbehaving operation. Research has already produced valuable results in providing observability for bus-based systems, such as ARM’s Coresight technology [1]. Also First Silicon’s onchip instrumentation technology (OCI) provides on-chip logic analyzers for AMBAAHB, OCP, and Sonics Silicon Backplane bus systems [2]. These solutions allow the user to capture bus activity at run-time, and can be combined in a multi-core embedded debug system with in-system analyzers for cores, for example, for MIPS cores. Because buses offer limited bandwidth, these simple bus-based systems at first evolved using hierarchies of multiple interconnected buses. This solution offered the required increase in bandwidth but made the design more complex and ad hoc, and proved difficult to scale. As systems increase in number of interconnected components, communication complexity, and bandwidth requirements, we see a shift toward the use of generic networks (Networks-on-Chips) that can meet the communication requirements of recent and future complex Systems-on-Chips (SoC). Figure 1 shows the use of a regular topology for the crea-

tion of a heterogeneous SoC. An example of how a heterogeneous application can be mapped on this SoC is also

Fig.1. Network-on-Chip based on a regular topology

depicted. Of course the topology does not have to be reg-

© 2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617 http://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 7, JULY 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617 https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

103

ular, as shown in Figure 2. However, this change dramatically increased the complexity of monitoring compared to the simpler systems for several reasons. First, the sheer increase in communi-

liability failures. The consequence is that the designer has to deal not only with static faults, but also transient faults, wear-out of devices, etc. To address this challenge, future systems need to support redundant paths and resources, and the ability to rearrange their operation to isolate and bypass failures when they occur. This operation requires a quick identification of the existence of a problem and its location to determine the correct repair action. Regarding the NoC resources, both functions can be achieved by network monitoring.

2 MONITORING OBJECTIVES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Monitoring can be used to provide information for many different applications that are related to the overall SoC management. The following subsections detail the main uses of network monitoring.

Fig.2. Network-on-Chip based on an irregular topology

cation bandwidth of each component increases the amount of information that needs to be monitored or traced. Second, the structure of the system does not provide the single, convenient central-monitoring location any more. As communication in most cases is conducted in a point-to-point, not broadcast, fashion, monitoring recent and future systems is a distributed operation. Despite all the difficulties that must be overcome for successful monitoring, the complexity of SoCs offers additional opportunities as well to deal with many challenges such as: short time to market, increasing fabrication (mask) cost, incomplete specifications at design time, and changing customer requirements. These challenges increased the complexity of SoC designs, which are designed with increased versatility so that they can cover more application space and increase the product lifetime. These two factors, increased complexity and increased flexibility, lead to a dynamic system behavior that cannot be known in advance at design time. This opens the possibility for dynamic system management, where application behavior is monitored and adjustments of the system and its operation can be made either to improve the application function (e.g., provide better QoS) or to optimize the system’s operation (e.g., consume less energy). Exploiting these opportunities depends on knowing the runtime characteristics of the system’s operation. For a network-based design, this can be achieved using network monitoring. Furthermore, new opportunities appear as we move toward deep submicron implementation technologies. In these future technologies, device reliability is an issue as they are susceptible to a range of post manufacturing re-

2.1 Verification and Debugging Traditional monitoring is achieved by adding observability into internal points of a complex system. The observability is crucial to enable the designer to track the system’s operation and determine if and when something goes wrong. To this end, tracking the maximum possible amount of information is desired as it provides the best flexibility to the user, who is then responsible to focus on the exact needed bits and pieces. For testing the nodes of the SoC, one approach is to provide a Test Access Mechanism (TAM), which reuses the network resources [3] to minimize the cost and improve the speed of testing probes. The key observation is that due to its role, NoC is a central piece of the SoC. TAM interfaces with test wrappers, built around the cores, to apply test vectors to the cores under test, and also collects and delivers the possible responses. However, this type of operation is intrusive and useful only for off-line testing. Another important benefit of monitoring is to use it for debugging purposes. When the system is in operation and we want to extract information, we can track the system progress without affecting its operation (i.e., in a nonintrusive manner). To achieve this goal, the testing wrappers should provide the necessary information to the monitoring infrastructure, which can then deliver it to the tester without affecting the application’s behavior. 2.2 Network Parameters Adaptation Monitoring can be applied in a parameterized network to provide information for the update of the configuration or run-time parameters. For example, when the NoC uses adaptive routing, updates to the routing tables can better distribute the load, reduce the latency variation that is caused by congestion, and improve the overall system’s performance. NoC monitoring can provide the necessary input to a decision-making algorithm that updates the routing tables in the network. A similar application is to detect permanent network link malfunctions and errors (either permanent or even transient) and readjust the routing tables to avoid these defective links. This notion can be carried out even at the node level, where monitoring can detect defective processing nodes and provide feedback to the run-time system. De-

© 2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617 http://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 7, JULY 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617 https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

104

pending on the application, the run-time system should thus avoid the use of the defective node and migrate the processing to other functional nodes. The mechanisms to support the isolation of defective links or nodes are basically the same as the ones used in adaptive routing (i.e., updates in the routing tables), and, in a way, we can think of defective links or nodes as permanently saturated areas that need to be avoided.

2.3 Application Profiling For applications with dynamically changing behavior, monitoring their network patterns can offer an insight to their overall operation. This can be useful for the purpose of application profiling, a process to collect information about its run-time behavior. Profiling information can then be used to map the application on the existing resources in a better way. A similar application is when the network supports Quality of Service (QoS) guarantees and can allocate specific portions of link bandwidth to certain communication pairs. Monitoring can detect when the QoS contract is violated, and this information can be used as feed back to either simply detect the problem or take actions (i.e., adjust the QoS parameters) and fix it, if possible. Obtaining information regarding a NoC-based application can be used to enable intelligent power management of the NoC resources. NoC monitoring can detect statistically important changes in the communication patterns, and can readjust the speed of uncongested portions of the NoC to save power. When links and routers do not support multiple voltage and corresponding speed levels, the identified routers can be shutdown, and their (presumably noncritical) traffic can be rerouted via other low utilization routers. 2.4 Run-Time Reconfigurability Similar to readjusting the parameters is the use of runtime reconfigurable NoC systems. This approach has been explored as a promising way to overcome the potential performance bottlenecks, because communication parameters cannot be estimated beforehand as communication patterns vary dynamically and arbitration performs poorly. As a result, dynamic reconfiguration is used to change the key parameters of the NoC and eventually the communication characteristics can be tuned to better meet the current requirements at any given time. Such run-time reconfigurable NoC systems have been proposed [4–8]. Moreover, as the silicon devices are getting more and more complex, the testing of the NoC structure is becoming more difficult. Different Design-for-Testability (DfT) approaches have been proposed, to provide the means for NoC testing [9].However, a recent trend which is very promising is the use of certain run-time reconfigurable structures that can be used for ordinary operations as well as for testing of the NoC structures such as byM¨oller et al. [10]. For all run-time reconfigurable NoCs to adapt their structures on run-time, an efficient online monitoring system is required (such as the one by Mouhoub and Hammami [11]). This system can mainly be based on reconfigurable

networking interfaces. These networking interfaces will route the traffic, which is coming from the IPs that are connected to them, and will only keep statistics regarding the different characteristics of the traffic. The main difference between those monitoring systems and the others is that the former can take advantage of the run-time reconfiguration aspect in the following manner: Whenever scheduled, the interfaces will be altered in run-time and instead of sending usual data, they will be connected to a separate network infrastructure over which the monitoring data will be transferred to the main monitoring and reconfiguration module. Those run-time reconfigurable monitoring interfaces have the advantage of utilizing the same hardware resources with the standard NoC interfaces, and thus reduce the overall overhead of the monitoring schemes.

3 MONITORING INFORMATION IN NETWORKS-ONCHIPS
3.1 A High-Level Model of NoC Monitoring As in every monitoring system, a NoC monitoring scheme should collect samples that may range from simple bit-level events to whole messages. The system designer or ultimately the real-time service may need to trace fine grain information such as interrupt notifications, or even protocol messages and data. Testing a multiprocessor SoC obviously calls for a verification strategy, which needs to consider the inherent parallelism: the onchip network structure and the task attributes. Only a high-level approach can tackle such issues. Abstraction via filtering of a large amount of traced messages can be the key approach for a realistic monitoring service. 3.1.1 Events In the high-level schemes, the data collected are modeled in the forms that are called events [12]. Based on this approach, all the events have specific predefined formats and are most frequently categorized because they may have different meanings. According to Mansouri-Samani and Sloman [13], “an event is a happening of interest, which occurs instantaneously at a certain time.” Therefore information characterizing an event consists of (a) a timestamp giving the exact time the event occurred, (b) a source id that defines the source of the event, (c) a special identifier specifying the category that the event belongs to, and (d) the information that this event carries. The information of the events are called attributes of the events, and consist of an attribute identifier and a value. The exact attributes as well as the number of them depend on the category to which the event belongs. 3.1.2 Programming Model Another critical constituent of the high-level description of an NoC monitoring system is the programming model of the system. Such a model describes in detail the procedure needed for setting up the various monitoring services. In general, it consists of a sequence of basic tasks for configuring the NoC monitoring subsystems as well as a detailed reference description of implementing those

© 2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617 http://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 7, JULY 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617 https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

105

tasks. For example, Radulescu et al. have proposed a memory-mapped I/O programming model for configuring the different sub-modules of a NoC monitoring system [14]. The programming model should address the critical issue of NoC monitoring configuration time. In general, a NoC monitoring system can be configured at three possible points in time: (a) at NoC’s initialization time, (b) at NoC’s reconfiguration time, or (c) at run-time. Furthermore, the programming model should define the events that would be generated, the categories of the events that would be supported, the attributes of those events as well as a global timing/synchronization scheme and ways to start/freeze/stop the monitoring system. The programming model also defines whether the NoC monitoring system will be centralized or distributed. In a centralized monitoring service, all the monitoring information is collected at a central point; this approach is simple yet efficient for small NoCs. However, in case of SoCs with hundreds of different sub-modules, the collection of all the monitoring information at a central point may lead to the bottleneck of the NoC monitoring system. On the other hand, in a distributed monitoring service, the monitoring data are collected by concentrating components, which are interconnected together to be able to take a decision based on the global state of the NoC. Although this approach is more complicated than the centralized one, it removes the possible bottlenecks of the centralized approach and is also significantly more scalable.

• In-band traffic. In this case, the NoC traffic is transmitted over the NoC links either by using time division multiplexing (TDM) techniques or by sharing a network interface (NI). • Out-of-band traffic. When hard real-time diagnostic services are needed or when the NoC capacity is limited by communication-bounded applications, a separate interconnection scheme is used and the NoC monitoring traffic is considered out-of-band. Considering that the employed monitoring services are used for debugging, performance optimization purposes, or power management, it is clear that the choice of the appropriate interconnection structure is very critical because it may affect the overall efficiency of the NoC toward the opposite direction of the desired objective. A self-adapting monitor service could encompass programmable mechanisms to adjust the generated monitoring traffic in a dynamic manner. Using a hybrid methodology, the distributed NoC-monitoring subsystems or the central-monitor controller can support an efficient traffic management scheme and regulate the traffic from the NoC to the central diagnostic manager. However, placing extra functionality increases the overhead of the monitoring probes, in terms of area or energy consumption.

4 MEASUREMENT METHODS
One of the main problems in NoC monitoring is that processing the entire contents of every packet imposes high demands on packet probes and their hardware resources. For this reason, probes usually capture only the initial part of the packet that contains valuable information. Even then, and because the current NoCs work at extremely high speeds, the amount of data collected is huge. One way for reducing the volume of the data is by utilizing certain techniques for filtering, aggregation, and sampling just as it is done in the case of telecommunication network monitoring [15]. When sampling is employed and within an NoC monitoring infrastructure, a number of different sampling mechanisms can be utilized as described by Jurga [16]. The most important algorithms are the following: • Systematic packet sampling, which involves the selection of packets according to a deterministic function. This function can either be count-based, in which every kth packet is saved for monitoring purposes, or time-based, where a packet is selected at every constant time interval. As described by He and Hou [17], the count-based approach gives more accurate results in terms of the estimation of traffic parameters than the time-based one. • Random sampling, in which the selection of packets is triggered in accordance with a random process. Based on the simple algorithm, n samples are selected out of N packets; hence, it is sometimes called n-out-of-N sampling. A certain algorithm of random sampling is what is called probabilistic sampling. In this technique, the samples are chosen in accordance with a predefined selection probability. When each packet is selected independently with a fixed probability p, the sampling scheme is called

3.1.3 Traffic Management Traffic management is another component of most of the abstract models of NoC monitoring systems. In general, it is divided into two subsystems: the first manages the configuration traffic and the second covers the event traffic. The configuration traffic includes all the messages/events required to set up and configure the monitoring scheme, such as the events to configure the NoC monitoring hardware subsystems and the traffic for setting up connections for the transport of data from the actual NoC to the NoC-monitoring processing system. On the other hand, the event traffic management system deals with the traffic generated after the NoC has been thoroughly configured. 3.1.4 NoC Monitoring Communication Infrastructure NoC traffic monitoring system can use either the existing NoC intercommunication infrastructure or an added network that is implemented only to cover the requirements of the NoC monitoring systems. The former has the advantage that no extra interconnection system is needed but, on the other hand, it introduces additional traffic to the actual NoC. If this traffic causes performance problems, a dedicated NoC monitoring interconnection infrastructure is to be employed. Based on the selection of the desired interconnection scheme for the transmission of the actual measurements in an NoC monitoring system, the NoC data can be categorized as follows:

© 2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617 http://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 7, JULY 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617 https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

106

uniform probabilistic sampling, whereas when the probability p depends on the input (i.e., packet content) then this is non uniform probabilistic sampling. • The adaptive sampling schemes employ either a special heuristic for performing the sample process or certain prediction mechanisms for predicting future traffic and adjusting the sampling rate. The schemes have some inevitable disadvantages. There is always some latency in the adaptation process and, in case of unanticipated NoC traffic bursts, the saturation of the monitoring module will be possible. To avoid it, the NoC monitoring designer would have to allow a certain safety margin by employing systematic under sampling (obviously, at the cost of lower accuracy). Another way of reducing the traffic recorded by the network monitoring scheme is the use of filtering. In a formal definition, filtering is the deterministic selection of packets based on their content. In practice, the packets are selected if their content matches a specified mask. In the general case, this selection decision is not biased by the packet position in the packet stream. This approach may also require a relatively complex packet content inspection, because, depending on the NoC protocol employed, packets can have different formats and thus a fixed length mask cannot be applied. Finally, there are the hybrid techniques, which are based on combining a number of packet selection approaches. For instance, Scholler proposes to add packet sampling into the packet and create a scheme combining certain advantages of filtering and sampling [18]. Another example is Stratified Random Sampling. In this approach, packets are grouped into subsets according to a set of specific characteristics. Then, the number of samples is drawn randomly from each group. Regarding the advantages and the disadvantages of each scheme, it is obvious that systematic sampling can be easily implemented in hardware. As demonstrated by Sch¨oller et al. [18], and Harangsri et al. [19] in general networking environments systematic sampling often performs better than random sampling. The main disadvantage is that “it is vulnerable to bias if the metric being measured itself exhibits a period which is rationally related to the sampling interval” [20]. This problem can be overcome when random sampling is utilized. Depending on the specific SoC that an NoC is employed in, the hybrid sampling schemes can trigger the optimal point in the trade-off between the amount of data collected and the accuracy of the monitoring scheme. Such schemes can allow building accurate time series of different parameters and improving the accuracy of the classification of NoC traffic into flows, groups, etc. On the other hand, the filtering methods can be tuned to collect whatever NoC data are needed in each specific case, with the drawback of being relatively complex to be implemented mainly because of the extremely high speed of today’s NoCs. There are mainly two approaches to the actual transmission of the sampled/filtered data to the monitoring management processing system.

REFERENCES
[1] “Coresight,” ARM. [Online]. Available: http://www.arm.com/products/solutions/CoreSig ht.html. [2] R. Leatherman, “On-chip instrumentation approach to system-on-chip development,” First Silicon Solutions, 1997. Available: http://www.fs2.com/pdfs/OCI_Whitepaper.pdf. [3] Erika Cota, L. Carro, andM. Lubaszewski, “Reusing an on-chip network for the test of core-based systems,” ACMTransactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems (TOADES) 9 (2004) (4): 471–499. [4] A.Ahmadinia,C. Bobda, J.Ding,M.Majer, J. Teich, S. Fekete, and J. van derVeen, “A practical approach for circuit routing on dynamic reconfigurable devices,” Rapid System Prototyping, 2005. (RSP 2005).In Proc. of the 16th IEEE International Workshop, June 2005, 8–10, 84–90. [5] T. Bartic., J.-Y. Mignolet, V. Nollet, T. Marescaux, D. Verkest, S. Vernalde, and R. Lauwereins, “Topology adaptive network-on-chip design and implementation,” In Proc. of the IEEE Proceedings on Computers and Digital Techniques, 152 (July 2005) (4): 467–472. [6] C. Zeferino, M. E. Kreutz, and A. A. Susin, “Rasoc: A router soft-core for networks-on-chip.” In Proc. of Design, Automation and Test in Europe conference (DATE’04), February 2004, 198–203. [7] B. Sethuraman, P. Bhattacharya, J. Khan, and R. Vemuri, “Lipar: A light-weight parallel router for FPGA-based networks-on-chip.” In GLSVSLI ’05: Proc. of 15th ACM Great Lakes symposium on VLSI. New York: ACM, 2005, 452–457. [8] S. Vassiliadis and I. Sourdis, “Flux interconnection networks on demand,” Journal of Systems Architecture 53 (2007) (10): 777–793. [9] A. Amory, E. Briao, E. Cota, M. Lubaszewski, and F. Moraes, “A scalable test strategy for network-on-chip routers.” In Proc. of IEEE International Test Conference (ITC 2005), November 2005, 9. [10] L.M¨oller, I. Grehs, E. Carvalho, R. Soares, N. Calazans, and F.Moraes, “A NoC-based infrastructure to enable dynamic self reconfigurable systems.” In Proc. Of 3rd International Workshop on Reconfigurable Communication-Centric Systems-on-Chip (ReCoSoC), 2007, 23–30. [11] R. Mouhoub and O. Hammami, “NoC monitoring hardware support for fast NoC design space exploration and potential NoC partial dynamic reconfiguration.” In Proc. of International Symposiumon Industrial Embedded Systems (IES ’06), October 2006, 1–10. [12] C. Ciordas, T. Basten, A. R˘adulescu, K. Goossens, and J. V. Meerbergen, “An event-based monitoring service for networks on chip,” ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems (TOADES) 10 (2005) (4): 702–723. [13] M. Mansouri-Samani and M. Sloman, “A configurable event service for distributed systems.” In Proc. of Third International Conference on Configurable Distributed Systems, 1996, 210–217. [14] A. Radulescu, J. Dielissen, S. Pestana, O. Gangwal, E.

© 2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617 http://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 7, JULY 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617 https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

107

Rijpkema, P. Wielage, and K. Goossens, “An efficient on-chipNI offering guaranteed services, shared memory abstraction, and flexible network configuration,” IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 24 (January 2005) (1): 4–17. [15] P. Amer and L. Cassel, “Management of sampled real-time network measurements.” In Proc. of 14th Conference on Local Computer Networks, Oct. 10–12, 1989 62–68. [16] M. H. R. Jurga, “Packet sampling for network monitoring,” CERN Technical Report, Dec. 2007. [Online]. Available: http://cern.ch/openlab. [17] G. He and J. C. Hou, “An in-depth, analytical study of sampling techniques for self-similar internet traffic.” In ICDCS ’05: Proc. of 25th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 2005, 404–413. [18] M. Sch¨oller, T. Gamer, R. Bless, and M. Zitterbart, “An extension to packet filtering of programmable networks.” In Proc. of the 7th International Working Conference on Active Networking (IWAN), Sophia Antipolis, France, November 2005. [19] B. Harangsri, J. Shepherd, and A. Ngu, “Selectivity estimation for joins using systematic sampling.” In Proc. of Eighth International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, 1–2 September 1997, 384–389. [20] B.-Y.Choi andS.Bhattacharrya, “On the accuracy andoverheadof cisco sampled netflow.” In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics Workshop on Large-Scale Network Inference (LSNI), Banff, Canada, June 2005.

© 2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617 http://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/

Sponsor Documents

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on INBA.INFO

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close