基于重注入的死锁恢复路由算法能量分析

2008 International Symposium on System-on-Chip Pub Date : 2008-12-08 DOI:10.1109/ISSOC.2008.4694864

H. Kooti, M. Mirza-Aghatabar, S. Hessabi, Arash Tavakkol

{"title":"基于重注入的死锁恢复路由算法能量分析","authors":"H. Kooti, M. Mirza-Aghatabar, S. Hessabi, Arash Tavakkol","doi":"10.1109/ISSOC.2008.4694864","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are two strategies for deadlock handling in routing algorithms in NoC: deadlock avoidance and deadlock recovery. Some deadlock recovery routing algorithms are re-injection based, such as: Compressionless (CR), Software-Based (SW_TFAR) and AFBAR. In spite of the performance comparison, none of existing researches have focused on the energy consumption of various routing algorithms. We evaluate these routing algorithms according to their energy consumption and latency. Our experimental results show the better performance and worse energy consumption of deadlock recovery routing algorithms compared to deadlock avoidance routing algorithms. In addition, the best and worst energy consumption is dedicated to AFBAR and CR, respectively.","PeriodicalId":168022,"journal":{"name":"2008 International Symposium on System-on-Chip","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Energy analysis of re-injection based deadlock recovery routing algorithms\",\"authors\":\"H. Kooti, M. Mirza-Aghatabar, S. Hessabi, Arash Tavakkol\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ISSOC.2008.4694864\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There are two strategies for deadlock handling in routing algorithms in NoC: deadlock avoidance and deadlock recovery. Some deadlock recovery routing algorithms are re-injection based, such as: Compressionless (CR), Software-Based (SW_TFAR) and AFBAR. In spite of the performance comparison, none of existing researches have focused on the energy consumption of various routing algorithms. We evaluate these routing algorithms according to their energy consumption and latency. Our experimental results show the better performance and worse energy consumption of deadlock recovery routing algorithms compared to deadlock avoidance routing algorithms. In addition, the best and worst energy consumption is dedicated to AFBAR and CR, respectively.\",\"PeriodicalId\":168022,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2008 International Symposium on System-on-Chip\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-12-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2008 International Symposium on System-on-Chip\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSOC.2008.4694864\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2008 International Symposium on System-on-Chip","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSOC.2008.4694864","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在NoC路由算法中有两种死锁处理策略:死锁避免和死锁恢复。一些死锁恢复路由算法是基于重注入的，例如:Compressionless (CR)， Software-Based (SW_TFAR)和AFBAR。尽管进行了性能比较，但现有的研究都没有关注各种路由算法的能耗。我们根据它们的能量消耗和延迟来评估这些路由算法。实验结果表明，与死锁避免路由算法相比，死锁恢复路由算法具有更好的性能和更低的能耗。此外，AFBAR和CR的能耗分别为最佳和最差。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Energy analysis of re-injection based deadlock recovery routing algorithms

There are two strategies for deadlock handling in routing algorithms in NoC: deadlock avoidance and deadlock recovery. Some deadlock recovery routing algorithms are re-injection based, such as: Compressionless (CR), Software-Based (SW_TFAR) and AFBAR. In spite of the performance comparison, none of existing researches have focused on the energy consumption of various routing algorithms. We evaluate these routing algorithms according to their energy consumption and latency. Our experimental results show the better performance and worse energy consumption of deadlock recovery routing algorithms compared to deadlock avoidance routing algorithms. In addition, the best and worst energy consumption is dedicated to AFBAR and CR, respectively.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

2008 International Symposium on System-on-Chip

自引率

0.00%

发文量