System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -1-
Some Issues in System-Level Power Optimization
Abdil Rashid Mohamed, ESLAB, Ph.D. student
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -2-
Presentation Organization• 1015 - 1115 Abdil
– System-level Power/Energy Optimization Techniques
• 1115 - 1130 coffee break• 1130 - 1200 Mehdi part I• 1315 -1345 Mehdi part II
– Dynamic Power Management – Low Power Software Generation
• 1345 – 1400 coffee break • 1400 – 1500 Aleksandra
– Low Power/Energy Scheduling for Real–time Systems
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -3-
Outline
• Motivation - the compeling need for low power systems• Power reduction at
– conceptualization and modeling levels– design level - design of power efficient
• hardware units• memories and • communication buses
• Conclusion
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -4-
Why Low Power Electronic Systems ?
• Power/Energy is expensive, non-renewable and negatively impacts on environments
• Extend life of battery powered systems: laptops, PDAs.• In desktops and servers high power consumption raises
temperature and deteriorates performance and reliability.• Increases need for cooling mechanisms. • Technical feasibility of high performance computation due to
heat extraction• Power efficiency has: economic, ecological and ethical reasons. • It worth mention: power crisis in California, Tanzania.
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -5-
Power Reduction Techniques
• Static techniques for low power– Applied at conceptualization and design time– Synthesis for low power– Compilation for low power
• Dynamic techniques for low power– Dynamic power management (DPM) - use run time behavior to reduce
power consumption when system is serving light load or when idle• Dynamic voltage scaling (DVS)- change voltage at run time to manage power• Shutdown unused I/O devices, NIC, display or HDs
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -6-
Hardware Technologies for Low Power
• Very low supply voltage technologies.• Multiple supply voltages on a single chip.• Techniques for handling dynamically variable
supply voltage and/or clock speed.
LdddynCVfP 2
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -7-
System Organization and Sources of power Consumption
• Main consumers of energy in HW are: – computation, communication and storage units.
• Does software consume power ?• Energy efficient design of HW/SW systems:
– Need support of a design flow that takes power consumption into account at all steps of the design process.
– Power estimation metrics at different abstraction levels
– Drawbacks: Metrics are less accurrate at higher levels
– Power depends on implementation specific details
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -8-
Power Consideration at All Levels and Dimensions
Conceptualization andmodeling
Hardware & Softwaredesign
System management
Energy efficient designof both HW and SW
Specification and constraints
Hardware, software andrun-time management
Power constraints
Algorithms and architecture
Hardware platform & software
Abdil
Mehdi
Aleksandra
Organized in two dimensional taxonomy
Computation -> communication -> storage
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -9-
Conceptualization and Modeling:Specification and Implementation Models
System modeling Styles
Functional models
Executable Non-executable
Implementation models
Classes of Systems
General-purpose Systems Special-purpose Systems
Which modeling style is good for power consideration ?
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -10-
Specification and Implementation Models
• Functional models – addresses functionality and requirements– executable (VHDL, C++, Java; for simulation ) or non executable ( task
graph )
• Implementation models– describe the target realization for systems.– system complexity: modular, component oriented, hierarchical.– Implementation models for energy efficient systems modelling:
• Spreadsheet model-expresses a combination of components and evaluates overall energy budget
• Power state machine model captures the power consumption of systems and their constituents as they evolve through a sequence of operational states.
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -11-
Energy Efficient Design from Executable Functional Models
• Algorithm selection for low power– For a given common function, make a library of multiple different
algorithms – Characterize each algorithm with performance & power– Perform system optimization by:
• heuristic to select an implementation algorithm and supply voltage that trades off performance for power.
• Algorithm computational energy– Computational energy of the algorithm can be estimated using CDFG– Characterize each elementary operation with a computational energy
metric– Compose rules to compute energy cost of a complex CDFG. – Energy of elementary operations is obtained by assuming implementation
style and extract cost per operation through experiments
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -12-
Energy Efficient Design from Executable Functional Models
• Algorithm communication and storage energy– communication and storage cost is hidden in specifications– storage and communication energy: relate to locality of computation data– data variables with long life time -> increased storage need -> more power– problem: locality analysis from CDFG is hard, information not explicitly
available
• Computational kernels – is an inner loop of an algorithm where most of the time is spent during
execution– extract them by profiling data on executable system level model– implement on dedicated power-optimal hardware– during execution of kernel, rest of system can be shutdown, hence save power
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -13-
Power Estimation for non executable functional models: Task Graph
T1
T2
T3
T5
T6
T4T7
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.40.5
0.1
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.1
Period <
100
Dead
line =
70
Power PE1 PE2
T1 10 20
T2 15 30
T3 10 20
T4 11 7
T5 32 41
T6 7 10
T7 12 22
Time PE1 PE2
T1 5 8
T2 7 12
T3 4 7
T4 8 5
T5 20 35
T6 2 3
T7 11 17
Link Pow Speed
L1 10*BW 40*BW
L2 20’BW 30*BW
Mem Pow Speed
M1 50*S 12*S
M2 60*S 15*S
PE allocation, binding, scheduling
PE1: {T1->T2->T3->T7->T4}
PE2: {T5->T6}
Mem allocation
M1: {T5, T6}
M2: {T1, T2, T3, T4, T7}
Communication
PE1 <->PE2: L1
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -14-
Task Graph (contd. )– Computation energy:
EPE = EPE1 + EPE2 = (10+15+10+11+12) +(41+10) = 109
– Storage energy: EM = EM1 + EM2 = (0.5+0.3).50 +(0.1+0.1+0.3+0.1+0.1).60 = 88
– Communication energy: ECom = EPE1->PE2 + EPE2->PE1 = (0.1+0.4).20 = 10
– Total energy: E = EPE+EM+Ecom = 109+88+10 = 206
– Heuristic to minimize power for the task graph implementation
– Drawbacks: Need for exhaustive pre-characterization and loss of accuracy due to lack of information on the effects caused by hardware sharing.
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -15-
Energy efficient design from implementation models
• Spreadsheet model – Expresses a combination of components and evaluates overall
energy cost– Useful when designing systems that use specific parts and
interconnect topologies– Estimates the impact of a component on the power budget– Total power is the sum of the power of all components.– Power consumption of all components is taken from data sheets
and collected in a spreadsheet.– Drawback: do not model interaction between components
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -16-
Energy efficient design from implementation models
• Power State Machine (PSM)– State based model for system components
• states represent modes of operations • arcs represent legal transitions between op. modes • states are labelled with power dissipation values• transitions are labelled with triggering events, energy costs and
transition times.
– Advantages: • study how system reacts to different workloads• model interactions between components • analyze the effects of power management.
– Drawbacks: complex component model PSM for a memory component
RW
IDLE
OFF
off
off
Idle(1μsec)
P=40 μW
P=0 μW
RW(10μsec)
RW(150μsec)
P=250mW, activity
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -17-
Low Power Application Specific Units• Usually gives better power efficiency, but have low flexibility • Power reduction techniques: low power RTL, logic level and
physical level techniques– Power Driven Voltage Scaling (PDVS) and scaling down Vdd, reduce
power, but performance may diminish.– multiple supply voltages on a single chip (globally asynchronous and
locally synchronous systems (GALS) )– reduce clock frequency, load capacitance and switching activity.– set clock frequency of a component that is not performing useful work to
zero and nullify dynamic power consumption of that component
• A. Hemani: transformed single clock industrial designs into GALS - 70% power reduction
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -18-
Low Power through Switching Activity Reduction
+1 +3
AB C
+4
>5*2
H
(a)
+1
+3
AB
C+4
>5*2
HA
(b)
+1 and +3 bound to the same adder
Less power efficient schedule and binding
Power efficient schedule & binding
• Reduce the number of basic operations, -> transform DFG to minimize the number of operations
• Reduce switching of the inputs to functional unit (FU) -> increase correlation between successive patterns at the input of FU.
• Scheduling and binding for reduced switching activity
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -19-
Application Specific Processors
• Provides high degree of flexibility, programmability, and reuse• Not energy efficient and have several disadvantages:
– Power overhead for instruction fetch and decoding • not an issue for computation units with hardwired control
– Perform computation as a sequence of instruction execution ->power overhead
• can not take full advantage of algorithmic parallelism.
– Can perform a limited number of elementary operations specified by ISA
• Low power technique: Instruction subsetting -> reducing the number of instructions supported by ASIP – Reduce instruction decoding and micro architectural complexity
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -20-
Core Processors• Reduce power by:
– Voltage scaling
• low power version of μPs has low supply voltage
– Dynamic variable voltage supply
– Low power micro architecture design (critical path redesign)
• avoid useless switching activity in idle units
– Special instructions - enhance power & performance
• subword parallel, special addressing mode, multiply-accumulate
• problem: hard to design compilers for special instructions
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -21-
Design of Power-Efficient Memory Subsystems
– Memory accesses are slow and consume more power with increasing memory size
• reduce memory storage requirements of the applications
• during system conceptualization use principle of temporal locality to reduce memory storage requirement
• improve locality and reduce need for temporary storage of results of computation by consuming them ASAP
• Reduce memory need by data compression
– Advanced hierarchical memory architectures for low power
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -22-
Hierarchical Memory Models
• Power and access time increases as we move up memory hierarchy
• Exploit non uniformities in access frequencies of data– Place frequently accessed locations in low hierarchies to
minimize average cost per access
FU
FULevel 0
Level 1Level 2
Level 3
P0,T0P1,T1
P2,T2
P3,T3
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -23-
Low Power Communication Resources
– At physical level communication power is reduced :• scaling down the voltage swing on the high capacitance
wires of the bus
• scaling down the average number of signal transitions
– low power data encoding– Arbitration protocols
• bus access control
• reduce bus power by scheduling & binding highly correlated data streams consecutively on the bus
Module AEnc Decbus
control
Minimum switching
Module A
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -24-
Low Power Bus Design- Low power bus design techniques
- lower switching activity, reduce capacitance to be switched
- minimize bus length by module placement and bus routing
- build hierarchical bus
- Bus segmentation – - transform a long heavily loaded global bus into a partitioned
multistage network by inserting pass transistors on the bus lines to separate various local buses (segments)
- partitioning can reduce bus power by 60%
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -25-
Conclusion
• A balance between power and performance• Designing energy efficient systems is a multifaceted
problem: high degree of freedom for power reduction at all abstraction levels
• Main referenece: Benini, D. Micheli, ”System level Power Optimization: Techniques and Tools”
THE END
System-Level Power Optimization TechniquesSystem-Level Power Optimization Techniques -26-
Power Crisis• It worth mention: Power crisis in California, Tanzania. • Companies install their own power plants to cope with the problem. • 12$ additional surcharge per day per room due to increased power cost at some hotels. • Refereences from: • http://www.aspstreet.com/archive/d.taf/what,show/id,6362/sid,14 Keeping the Silicon Burning:
California's Power Crisis Concern for Data Centers The lights in California may fade, but data and Web pages are still served up. “What we’ve done is protect our customers,” asserts Lloyd Howison, senior manager of construction and engineering for Web hosting at WorldCom. Data centers themselves contribute significantly to the power problem. Full of servers, disk drives, networking gear and cooled air, data centers consume a staggering amount of electricity. Reportedly, a data center gobbles as much power as six office buildings. A widely publicized 1999 study estimated that eight percent of the U.S. consumption of electricity was Internet related.
• An Internet service provider data warehouse with 8,000 servers consume as much as 2 MW of power. A household in Tanzania gets only about 600KWh per month.
• NB: “Since embedded systems are increasingly being used and are massively produced not only for mobile devices, but most of them end up in stationary home based or industry based devices, every Mw of power that can be saved will result in tremendous power savings in total due to mass production of similar embedded VLSI systems” by Abdil.
• Since energy consumption of electronic systems will scale up as they become more complex and integrated, energy-efficient electronic system development is mandated by economic, ecological and ethical reasons.
Just for you
r inform
ation !