Optimal Implementation of Power Saving Techniques in CGR Systems

Abstract

Coarse-Grained Recon gurable (CGR) architectures combine high performance with exibility, allowing the execution of a large set of applications over the same substrate. However, they are also required to be energy e cient. This work focuses on a methodology to identify which parts of a CGR architecture may bene t from the application of power saving techniques, guiding the designers towards an optimal implementation of clock gated and power gated designs.

Keywords

• Recon gurable Systems Power Saving Clock Gating Power Modeling Datapath Merging

-

Nowadays small portable devices are required to e ciently execute multiple fancy functions. Recon gurable systems [ 1 ] are a suitable solution for these colliding requirements. In particular, Coarse-Grained Recon gurable (CGR) systems o er higher performance with a certain degree of exibility. In CGR systems all the resources belonging to the possible con gurations are instantiated in the substrate, and they are multiplexed in time. Thus CGR o er fast recon guration, paying the cost of the power consumed by the resources present in the substrate but not involved in active con guration.

Power consumption in digital devices is computed as in Equation 1, where: 1) Plkg is the static power dissipation caused by leakage currents, consumed even while no circuit activity is present; 2) Pint is the dynamic power consumption mainly due to the cell switching activity; (3) Pnet is again a dynamic term, related to the interconnection. With technologies below 90 nm, designers are required to minimize both static (Plkg) and dynamic (Pint + Pnet) terms.

P =Plkg + Pint + Pnet (1)

A popular technique to minimize dynamic power consumption is the clock gating (CG). It consists on switching o the clock of resources not involved in the computation, and it is applied automatically, at gate level, by commercial synthesizers. On the other hand, power gating (PG) shuts-o the power of unused logic, thus acting also on static consumption. PG requires the instantiation of several resources (i.e. sleep transistors to switch on/o the power supply, isolation cells to avoid the transmission of spurious signals and state retention logic to maintain the internal state of the gated region) and the rules to manage them are quite complicated, thus commercial tools do not provide it automatically.

In a CGR architecture, considering the minimum set of disjointed Logic Regions (LRs), composed of processing elements that are always active/inactive together, it is possible to apply to all of them CG or PG techniques. However, if on one hand CG requires only one AND gate for each region to switch o the clock tree, PG has a much higher cost due to the additional logic, and the power overhead may easily overcome the power saved by switching o the unused resources. The research presented in this paper studied an automatic system-level analysis and implementation ow to estimate in advance the cost of CG and PG application in a CGR system, leading to the identi cation of those LRs that can bene t from the application of these power saving techniques. 2

Methods and Algorithm

The proposed model (see Equations 2 and 3) estimate Plkg and Pint of Equation 1, when PG and CG are applied at LRs level. They are composed of two terms: 1) Plkg=intON (LRi) - consumption within the considered LRs; 2) Ext Overlkg=int(LRi) - consumption due to the logic inserted outside the LR. =

Plkg=int(LRi) = Plkg=intON (LRi) + Ext Overlkg=int(LRi) =

X

[Plkg=int(cmb) + Plkg=int(RC) #rtn+ actors2LRi +Plkg=int(reg) (#reg

#rtn)=#reg] T iON + +[Plkg=int(ISOON ) T iON + Plkg=int(ISOOF F ) T iOF F ] #iso+ +[Plkg=int(ContrON ) T iON + Plkg=int(ContrOF F ) T iOF F ]+ +[Plkg=int(CGON ) T iON + Plkg=int(CGOF F ) T iOF F ]

actors2LRi =

Plkg=int(LRi) = Plkg=intON (LRi) + Ext Overlkg=int(LRi) =

X

[Plkg=int(cmb) + Plkg=int(reg) T iON ]+ +[Plkg=int(CGON ) T iON + Plkg=int(CGOF F ) T iOF F ] (2) (3) In particular, the Equations present the following contributions: { Combinatorial Logic [Plkg=int(cmb) T iON and Plkg=int(cmb)]: sum of the contributions of the combinational cells, weighted for the activation time T iON . CG switches o only the clock tree; therefore, combinational logic is always active when CG is applied. { Sequential Logic [Plkg=int(reg) (#reg #rtn)=#reg T iON and Plkg=int(reg) T iON ]: this term consider only those registers (#reg) inside the LR that are not replaced by the retention cells. CG does not have e ect on the static power, thus when it is applied only the internal contribution is multiplied by T iON (Plkg(reg) and Pint(reg) T iON ). { Retention Cells [Plkg=int(RC) #rtn T iON )]: This term consider the retention cells inserted to preserve the status of some registers (#rtn), when PG is applied. Plkg=int(RC) is the consumption of a single retention cell. { Isolation Cells [[Plkg=int(ISOON ) T iON + Plkg=int(ISOOF F ) T iOF F ] #iso]: In the PG case, isolation cells are inserted and their dissipation is proportional to their overall number. { Clock Gating Cells Plkg=int(CGON ) T iON + Plkg=int(CGOF F ) T iOF F ]: Clock gating cells are used in both PG and CG cases. In the PG case they are required for the proper operation of the retention cells. { Power Controller [Plkg=int(ContrON ) T iON +Plkg=int(ContrOF F ) T iOF F ]: inserted to properly drive the enable signals to the power saving logic.

This estimation model has been embedded in the automatic design ow for CGR systems o ered by the Multi-Data ow Composer (MDC) tool [ 2 ]. MDC handles the automatic composition and deployment of CGR systems, starting from the high-level speci cation of the kernels to be executed, represented as networks [ 3 ]. MDC o ers also other functionalities: 1) a structural pro ler that performs the design space exploration of the implementable multi-functional systems to determine the optimal CGR substrate [ 4 ]; 2) a power manager that partitions the multi-functional network, identifying the minimum set of disjointed LRs and applies to all of them either CG [ 5 ] or PG [ 6 ] (generating an ad-hoc common power format (CPF) le to specify the power intent early in the design [ 7 ]); a rapid prototyper to embed the CGR system into a Xilinx compliant IP [ 8, 9 ]. The MDC power manager has been extended to analyze the design, exploiting the estimation ow, to identify which regions may mostly bene t of PG and CG application [ 10, 11 ].

Datapath Merging s s e c o r P g n i g r e

M

NETs CGR NET

Baseline HDL Generation sn in iiceoggR ittcaeon Lo Id s i s y l a n A r e w o P

HDL eG Scripts n o i LDH traen L n D io H t /PGG raeen C G

Synthesizer

Reports

LR identi cation

Power Saving Application

Fig. 1. Proposed analysis and implementation ow.

Fig. 1 shows the complete analysis and implementation ow. MDC derives the HDL code of the baseline CGR system and provides the scripts to perform the synthesis and all the simulations for the system back annotation. Commercial tools are used to determine the baseline system power reports, which are fed back to MDC. MDC identi es the LRs and estimates the number of isolation cells (#iso) at data ow level by analyzing the connections between the di erent LRs. These data, together with the information gathered by the reports of a single synthesis run of the baseline CGR system netlist, are used to estimate power consumption of the identi ed LRs (consumption of the additional power saving logic - isolation cells and retention cells is estimated by characterizing the adopted technology libraries).

The power estimation ow analyzes the LRs according to Algorithm 1: { area evaluation: PG overhead may a ect the power consumption of the smaller LRs. Thus, too small LRs are evaluated only for CG application. The threshold value is set by the user. { PG evaluation: the power variations due to PG and CG application are estimated. If PG results more convenient than CG, the LR is candidated for the implementation of PG application. Otherwise, CG is evaluated. { CG evaluation: the power variation due to CG application is estimated. If it is not able to save any power, LR is discarded and its logic will be included in the always on domain.

Algorithm 1: Power saving strategy selection for CGR systems.

PG set is empty;

CG set is empty; foreach LRi in set LRs do

evaluate area(LRi, areath) end function: evaluate area(LRi, areath): calculate LRi area; if areaLR > areath then

evaluate PG(LRi); else end

evaluate CG(LRi); PG evaluation: evaluate PG(LRi): estimate PG total overhead; else end if P G total overhead < 0 then estimate CG total overhead; if P G total overhead < CG total overhead then add LRi to PG set; add LRi to CG set; else

evaluate CG(LRi); end evaluate CG(LRi);

CG evaluation: evaluate CG(LRi):

estimate CG total overhead; if CG total overhead < 0 then add LRi to CG set; To assess the proposed methodology, two di erent applications are considered, an FFT application and a computing core accelerating a zoom application. The Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) [ 12 ] is an optimised algorithm for the Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT) calculation; a DFT of size 2 (radix-2) takes the name of butter y. The adopted use case involves a CGR radix-2 FFT of size 8, where 4 di erent con gurations are available, FFT that uses: 1) 12 butter ies; 2) 4 butter ies; 3) 2 butter ies; 4) 1 butter y. In this design MDC identi ed 8 LRs. The Zoom coprocessor is composed of seven computational kernels: 1) absolute value calculation; 2) Bilevel/grayscale block checking; 3) Linear combination calculation; 4) Cubic lter convolution; 5) Median calculation; 6) Maximum/minimum nding; 7) Edge block checking. These kernels have been modelled as networks and implemented over a CGR hardware accelerator. In this CGR co-processor MDC identi ed 13 LRs. To validate cross-application and cross-technology effectiveness of the proposed estimation model, this section presents assessment on three implementations: FFT targeting a 90 nm CMOS technology; Zoom targeting a 90 nm CMOS technology; Zoom targeting a 45 nm CMOS technology.

These designs have been synthesized using Cadence RTL Compiler, then generated post-synthesis simulation reports have been fed back to MDC tool to estimate the power consumption of gated LRs, by applying Equations 2 and 3. In order to calculate the accuracy of the proposed estimation models, one power gated and one clock gated design for each identi ed LR have been implemented. Tab. 1 reports the real (extracted from the post-synthesis reports) and estimated percentage power variation for each LR, respectively when CG and PG strategies are applied. Comparing real power variations with estimated ones we see that the worst estimation is related to LR4 of FFT, whose percentage power variation is so low (-0.67%) that it is impossible to estimate it accurately. For this reason, the algorithm that evaluates the LRs keeps in consideration also their area.

Tab. 1 also depicts the percentage area of each LR with respect to design area. As expected, biggest regions (LR1 in FFT and LR2 in Zoom) are the ones with the highest power saving, regardless of the considered strategy (PG or CG). Also the composition of the considered LR has an impact on the e ectiveness of the applied power saving technique. LR1 of FFT is 99% combinational, thus CG can save really little amount of power in this region. However, simply considering the LR size may not be su cient to identify the best candidate for power saving; indeed it is possible to notice that LR3 of FFT is 15.8% of total area, but switching it o only saves about 6% or total power.

The presented methodology speeds-up the evaluation of power saving application estimating in advance the e ectiveness of PG or CG if applied to the LRs of a CGR system. For a CGR system composed of N input networks, only one of the baseline design without any power management, and N (one for each kernel) simulations to retrieve the real switching activity of the system, are required. Otherwise, it would be necessary to implement a design for each identi ed LR for both CG and PG applications, plus the baseline one (to evaluate the cost and bene t of the chosen power saving technique).

As a follow up of this research it is necessary to improve the model, considering in the power estimation also the contribution of the interconnection which currently is not addressed. Furthermore, power switches overhead is not considered yet; these sleep transistors are inserted only during place and route ow, and a way to estimate in advance how many switches are going to be inserted for each LR has not been explored yet. The number of switches has e ect on the rush currents during power-up transitions, and on the power-down/up timing, thus also these issues are going to be addressed in a future work. 4

Related Works

To the best of our knowledge, literature does not treat the problem of modeling PG and CG costs in CGR designs. Sha que at al. [ 13 ] focuses on low-power techniques and power modeling for FPGAs. In [ 14 ], only CG is taken into account: di erent power states are de ned and their consumption is characterized by low-level power analysis results. The work in [ 15 ] focuses on estimating the leakage reduction for PG and reverse body bias.

Other approaches perform an estimation that considers di erent components. For instance, Stokke at al. [ 16 ] propose a power modeling method for the Tegra K1 CPU, that taking into account measured rail voltages and ne-grained hardware activity predictors, expose components such as rail and core leakage currents. The FALPEM framework [ 17 ] provides power estimations at pre-register transfer level (RTL) stage, speci cally targeting the power consumed by clock network and interconnection, but PG and CG costs are not de ned. Finally, Li et al. [ 18 ] propose an architecture-level integrated power, area, and timing modeling framework for multi-core systems, that evaluates system building blocks (i.e., CPU, buses, etc.) for di erent technology nodes, providing also PG support.

References

1. R. Hartenstein , \ A Decade of Recon gurable Computing: a Visionary Retrospective," in Proc. of Design, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE'01) , 2001 .

2. F. Palumbo et al., \ Power-Awarness in Coarse-Grained Recon gurable MultiFunctional Architectures: a Data ow Based Strategy," Journal of Signal Processing Systems , vol. 87 , pp. 81 { 106 , Apr 2017 . doi: 10 .1007/s11265-016-1106-9.

3. C. Sau et al., \ Automated design ow for multi-functional data ow-based platforms," Journal of Signal Processing Systems , vol. 85 , pp. 143 { 165 , Oct 2016 .

4. F. Palumbo et al., \ Power-awarness in coarse-grained recon gurable designs: A data ow based strategy," in Workshop on Signal Processing Systems , 2014 .

5. F. Palumbo et al., \ Coarse-grained recon guration: data ow-based power management," IET Computers Digital Techniques , vol. 9 , no. 1 , pp. 36 { 48 , 2015 .

6. T. Fanni et al., \Automated Power Gating Methodology for Data ow-based Recon gurable Systems," in Conference on Computing Frontiers , 2015 .

7. SI2 ., Si2 Common Power Format Speci cationTM - Version 2 .1, Dec . 2014 .

8. C. Sau et al., \Automatic generation of data ow-based recon gurable co-processing units," in Conf. on Design and Architectures for Signal and Image Processing, 2014 .

9. C. Sau et al., \ Recon gurable coprocessors synthesis in the MPEG-RVC domain," in Conference on ReConFigurable Computing and FPGAs , 2015 .

10. T. Fanni et al., \Power and Clock Gating Modelling in Coarse Grained Recon gurable Systems," in Conference on Computing Frontiers , 2016 .

11. F. Palumbo et al., \Modelling and automated implementation of optimal power saving strategies in coarse-grained recon gurable architectures," Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering , p. 27 , 2016 . doi: 10 .1155/ 2016 /4237350.

12. J. Cooley and J. Tukey , \ An Algorithm for the Machine Computation of Complex Fourier Series , vol. 19 , " Mathematics of Computation , 1965 .

13. M. Sha que et al., \Adaptive Energy Management for Dynamically Recon gurable Processors," IEEE Trans. on CAD of Integrated Circuits and Systems , vol. 33 , no. 1 , pp. 50 { 63 , 2014 .

14. J. Yi and J. Kim , \ Power modeling for digital circuits with clock gating," IEICE Electronics Express , vol. 12 , no. 24 , pp. 20150817 { 20150817 , 2015 .

15. H. Xu et al., \ Run-time Active Leakage Reduction by Power Gating and Reverse Body Biasing: An Energy View," in Conference on Computer Design , 2008 .

16. K. R. Stokke et al., \ High-Precision Power Modelling of the Tegra K1 Variable SMP Processor Architecture," in Symposium on Embedded Multicore/Many-core Systems-on- Chip , 2016 .

17. A. Chhabra et al., \FALPEM: framework for architectural-level power estimation and optimization for large memory sub-systems," IEEE Trans. on CAD of Integrated Circuits and Systems , vol. 34 , no. 7 , pp. 1138 { 1142 , 2015 .

18. S. Li et al., \ The McPAT Framework for Multicore and Manycore Architectures: Simultaneously Modeling Power, Area, and Timing," TACO , vol. 10 , no. 1 , p. 5 , 2013 .