The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.03 - May/June (2008 vol.28)
pp: 6-16
Kyle J. Nesbit , University of Wisconsin-Madison
Miquel Moreto , Polytechnic University of Catalonia
Francisco J. Cazorla , Barcelona Supercomputing Center
Alex Ramirez , Barcelona Supercomputing Center and Polytechnic University of Catalonia
Mateo Valero , Barcelona Supercomputing Center and Polytechnic University of Catalonia
James E. Smith , University of Wisconsin-Madison
ABSTRACT
Current resource management mechanisms and policies are inadequate for future multicore systems. Instead, a hardware/software interface based on the virtual private machine abstraction would allow software policies to explicitly manage microarchitecture resources. VPM policies, implemented primarily in software, translate application and system objectives into VPM resource assignments. Then, VPM mechanisms securely multiplex, arbitrate, or distribute hardware resources to satisfy the VPM assignments.
INDEX TERMS
multicore, resource management, quality of service
CITATION
Kyle J. Nesbit, Miquel Moreto, Francisco J. Cazorla, Alex Ramirez, Mateo Valero, James E. Smith, "Multicore Resource Management", IEEE Micro, vol.28, no. 3, pp. 6-16, May/June 2008, doi:10.1109/MM.2008.43
REFERENCES
1. S. Lohr and M. Helft, "Google Gets Ready to Rumble with Microsoft," New York Times,16 Dec. 2007, www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/technology16goog.html .
2. F.J. Cazorla et al., "Predictable Performance in SMT Processors: Synergy between the OS and SMTs," IEEE Trans. Computers, vol. 55, no. 7, Jul. 2006, pp. 785-799.
3. K.J. Nesbit, J. Laudon, and J.E. Smith, Virtual Private Machines: A Resource Abstraction for Multicore Computer Systems, tech. report 07-08, Electrical and Computer Engineering Dept., University of Wisconsin–Madison, Dec. 2007.
4. R. Levin et al., "Policy/Mechanism Separation in Hydra," Proc. 5th ACM Symp. Operating Systems Principles (SOSP 75), ACM Press, 1975, pp. 132-140.
5. G.J. Popek and R.P. Goldberg, "Formal Requirements for Virtualizable Third Generation Architectures," Comm. ACM, vol. 74, no. 7, Jul. 1974, pp. 412-421.
6. P. Goyal, X. Guo, and H.M. Vin, "A Hierarchical CPU Scheduler for Multimedia Operating Systems," SIGOPS Operating Systems Rev., vol. 30, no. SI, Oct. 1996, pp. 107-121.
7. J.K. Ousterhout, "Scheduling Techniques for Concurrent Systems," Proc. Int'l Conf. Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS 82), IEEE CS Press, 1982, pp. 22-30.
8. A.K. Parekh and R.G. Gallager, "A Generalized Processor Sharing Approach to Flow Control in Integrated Services Networks: The Single-Node Case," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networks, vol. 1, no. 3, Jun. 1993, pp. 344-357.
9. J.W. Lee and K. Asanovic, "METERG: Measurement-Based End-to-End Performance Estimation Technique in QoS-Capable Multiprocessors," Proc. 12th IEEE Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symp. (RTAS 06), IEEE CS Press, 2006, pp. 135-147.
10. A.S. Sedra and K.C. Smith, Microelectronic Circuits, 5th ed., Oxford Univ. Press, 2004.
11. D.R. Engler, M.F. Kaashoek, and J. O'Toole, "Exokernel: An Operating System Architecture for Application-Level Resource Management," Proc. 15th ACM Symp. Operating Systems Principles (SOSP 95), ACM Press, Dec. 1995, pp. 251-266.
12. J. Smith and R. Nair, Virtual Machines: Versatile Platforms for Systems and Processes, Morgan Kaufmann, 2005.
13. S.K. Baruah et al., "Proportionate Progress: A Notion of Fairness in Resource Allocation," Proc. 25th ACM Symp. Theory of Computing (STOC 93), ACM Press, 1993, pp. 345-354.
14. G.E. Suh, S. Devadas, and L. Rudolph, "A New Memory Monitoring Scheme for Memory-Aware Scheduling and Partitioning," Proc. 8th Int'l Symp. High-Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA 02), IEEE CS Press, 2002, pp. 117-128.
30 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool