Inherent Limitations of Hybrid Transactional Memory

Several Hybrid Transactional Memory (HyTM) schemes have recently been proposed to complement the fast, but best-effort, nature of Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) with a slow, reliable software backup. However, the fundamental limitations of building a HyTM with nontrivial concurrency between har...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Alistarh, Dan, Kopinsky, Justin, Kuznetsov, Petr, Ravi, Srivatsan, Shavit, Nir
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title
container_volume
creator Alistarh, Dan
Kopinsky, Justin
Kuznetsov, Petr
Ravi, Srivatsan
Shavit, Nir
description Several Hybrid Transactional Memory (HyTM) schemes have recently been proposed to complement the fast, but best-effort, nature of Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) with a slow, reliable software backup. However, the fundamental limitations of building a HyTM with nontrivial concurrency between hardware and software transactions are still not well understood. In this paper, we propose a general model for HyTM implementations, which captures the ability of hardware transactions to buffer memory accesses, and allows us to formally quantify and analyze the amount of overhead (instrumentation) of a HyTM scheme. We prove the following: (1) it is impossible to build a strictly serializable HyTM implementation that has both uninstrumented reads and writes, even for weak progress guarantees, and (2) under reasonable assumptions, in any opaque progressive HyTM, a hardware transaction must incur instrumentation costs linear in the size of its data set. We further provide two upper bound implementations whose instrumentation costs are optimal with respect to their progress guarantees. In sum, this paper captures for the first time an inherent trade-off between the degree of concurrency a HyTM provides between hardware and software transactions, and the amount of instrumentation overhead the implementation must incur.
doi_str_mv 10.48550/arxiv.1405.5689
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>arxiv_GOX</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_arxiv_primary_1405_5689</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1405_5689</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a659-5b66c9bf67d6c38f052a3b00d7e4baa014a80b1e0dea619297290977c49f65543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotzrFqwzAUhWEtHUravVPQC9i5snQlaywhaQIuWbybK1sigtgusgnx2we3nQ78w-Fj7ENArkpE2FF6xHsuFGCOurSvTJ6Hq09-mHkV-zjTHMdh4mPgp8Wl2PE60TBRu2a68W_fj2l5Yy-BbpN__98Nq4-Hen_KqsvXef9ZZaTRZui0bq0L2nS6lWUALEg6gM545YhAKCrBCQ-dJy1sYU1hwRrTKhs0opIbtv27_UU3Pyn2lJZmxTcrXj4By_I-dw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Inherent Limitations of Hybrid Transactional Memory</title><source>arXiv.org</source><creator>Alistarh, Dan ; Kopinsky, Justin ; Kuznetsov, Petr ; Ravi, Srivatsan ; Shavit, Nir</creator><creatorcontrib>Alistarh, Dan ; Kopinsky, Justin ; Kuznetsov, Petr ; Ravi, Srivatsan ; Shavit, Nir</creatorcontrib><description>Several Hybrid Transactional Memory (HyTM) schemes have recently been proposed to complement the fast, but best-effort, nature of Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) with a slow, reliable software backup. However, the fundamental limitations of building a HyTM with nontrivial concurrency between hardware and software transactions are still not well understood. In this paper, we propose a general model for HyTM implementations, which captures the ability of hardware transactions to buffer memory accesses, and allows us to formally quantify and analyze the amount of overhead (instrumentation) of a HyTM scheme. We prove the following: (1) it is impossible to build a strictly serializable HyTM implementation that has both uninstrumented reads and writes, even for weak progress guarantees, and (2) under reasonable assumptions, in any opaque progressive HyTM, a hardware transaction must incur instrumentation costs linear in the size of its data set. We further provide two upper bound implementations whose instrumentation costs are optimal with respect to their progress guarantees. In sum, this paper captures for the first time an inherent trade-off between the degree of concurrency a HyTM provides between hardware and software transactions, and the amount of instrumentation overhead the implementation must incur.</description><identifier>DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1405.5689</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>Computer Science - Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing</subject><creationdate>2014-05</creationdate><rights>http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>228,230,776,881</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5689$$EView_record_in_Cornell_University$$FView_record_in_$$GCornell_University$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1405.5689$$DView paper in arXiv$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Alistarh, Dan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kopinsky, Justin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuznetsov, Petr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ravi, Srivatsan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shavit, Nir</creatorcontrib><title>Inherent Limitations of Hybrid Transactional Memory</title><description>Several Hybrid Transactional Memory (HyTM) schemes have recently been proposed to complement the fast, but best-effort, nature of Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) with a slow, reliable software backup. However, the fundamental limitations of building a HyTM with nontrivial concurrency between hardware and software transactions are still not well understood. In this paper, we propose a general model for HyTM implementations, which captures the ability of hardware transactions to buffer memory accesses, and allows us to formally quantify and analyze the amount of overhead (instrumentation) of a HyTM scheme. We prove the following: (1) it is impossible to build a strictly serializable HyTM implementation that has both uninstrumented reads and writes, even for weak progress guarantees, and (2) under reasonable assumptions, in any opaque progressive HyTM, a hardware transaction must incur instrumentation costs linear in the size of its data set. We further provide two upper bound implementations whose instrumentation costs are optimal with respect to their progress guarantees. In sum, this paper captures for the first time an inherent trade-off between the degree of concurrency a HyTM provides between hardware and software transactions, and the amount of instrumentation overhead the implementation must incur.</description><subject>Computer Science - Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing</subject><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GOX</sourceid><recordid>eNotzrFqwzAUhWEtHUravVPQC9i5snQlaywhaQIuWbybK1sigtgusgnx2we3nQ78w-Fj7ENArkpE2FF6xHsuFGCOurSvTJ6Hq09-mHkV-zjTHMdh4mPgp8Wl2PE60TBRu2a68W_fj2l5Yy-BbpN__98Nq4-Hen_KqsvXef9ZZaTRZui0bq0L2nS6lWUALEg6gM545YhAKCrBCQ-dJy1sYU1hwRrTKhs0opIbtv27_UU3Pyn2lJZmxTcrXj4By_I-dw</recordid><startdate>20140522</startdate><enddate>20140522</enddate><creator>Alistarh, Dan</creator><creator>Kopinsky, Justin</creator><creator>Kuznetsov, Petr</creator><creator>Ravi, Srivatsan</creator><creator>Shavit, Nir</creator><scope>AKY</scope><scope>GOX</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140522</creationdate><title>Inherent Limitations of Hybrid Transactional Memory</title><author>Alistarh, Dan ; Kopinsky, Justin ; Kuznetsov, Petr ; Ravi, Srivatsan ; Shavit, Nir</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a659-5b66c9bf67d6c38f052a3b00d7e4baa014a80b1e0dea619297290977c49f65543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Computer Science - Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alistarh, Dan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kopinsky, Justin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuznetsov, Petr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ravi, Srivatsan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shavit, Nir</creatorcontrib><collection>arXiv Computer Science</collection><collection>arXiv.org</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alistarh, Dan</au><au>Kopinsky, Justin</au><au>Kuznetsov, Petr</au><au>Ravi, Srivatsan</au><au>Shavit, Nir</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Inherent Limitations of Hybrid Transactional Memory</atitle><date>2014-05-22</date><risdate>2014</risdate><abstract>Several Hybrid Transactional Memory (HyTM) schemes have recently been proposed to complement the fast, but best-effort, nature of Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) with a slow, reliable software backup. However, the fundamental limitations of building a HyTM with nontrivial concurrency between hardware and software transactions are still not well understood. In this paper, we propose a general model for HyTM implementations, which captures the ability of hardware transactions to buffer memory accesses, and allows us to formally quantify and analyze the amount of overhead (instrumentation) of a HyTM scheme. We prove the following: (1) it is impossible to build a strictly serializable HyTM implementation that has both uninstrumented reads and writes, even for weak progress guarantees, and (2) under reasonable assumptions, in any opaque progressive HyTM, a hardware transaction must incur instrumentation costs linear in the size of its data set. We further provide two upper bound implementations whose instrumentation costs are optimal with respect to their progress guarantees. In sum, this paper captures for the first time an inherent trade-off between the degree of concurrency a HyTM provides between hardware and software transactions, and the amount of instrumentation overhead the implementation must incur.</abstract><doi>10.48550/arxiv.1405.5689</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1405.5689
ispartof
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_arxiv_primary_1405_5689
source arXiv.org
subjects Computer Science - Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing
title Inherent Limitations of Hybrid Transactional Memory
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T21%3A18%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-arxiv_GOX&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Inherent%20Limitations%20of%20Hybrid%20Transactional%20Memory&rft.au=Alistarh,%20Dan&rft.date=2014-05-22&rft_id=info:doi/10.48550/arxiv.1405.5689&rft_dat=%3Carxiv_GOX%3E1405_5689%3C/arxiv_GOX%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true