1. Using Dynamic Binary Translation to Fuse Dependent Instructions Shiliang Hu & James E. Smith

2. 2 Outline Introduction Fused Instruction Set Fusing Algorithm Evaluation Conclusion

3. 3 MicroArchitecture Model Dependence-based Architectures: ILDP [ISCA’02] etc. Fuse dependent instruction pairs to be processed as if single Introductions in the processor pipeline Both higher IPC and deeper pipelining can be achieved simultaneously. Original proposal by I.Kim and M. Lipasti Macro-op Scheduling [MICRO’03] (Hardware Intensive, RISC) Other related work on pipelined scheduling logic.

4. 4 Pipelined Scheduling Window Critical path in select-wakeup for single cycle instructions: If producer has latency > 1, then wakeup can be done a cycle late => wakeup and select in different pipe stages Reax  mem[Resi + 4] Select Wakeup Reax  Reax & 7 Reax  Reax & 7 :: Rebx  Reax+Rebx Select & Wakeup Select Rebx  Reax + Rebx Wakeup Selcct & Wakeup Recx  Rebx + 4 Recx  Rebx + 4

5. 5 Performance Implications Pros: –Effectively larger scheduling window by holding two instructions in the same window slot. –Effectively wider issue: by issuing one slot with two fused instructions, two dependent instructions are kicked off for execution with a single issue decision. –Can pipeline the scheduling logic without a heavy penalty if there is high fusing rate. Cons: –Non-fused single cycle instructions have two cycle latency. –If the head (the 1 st instr. in the pair) provides value to another critical consumer – most values are consumed only once. –If the tail (the 2 nd instr. in the pair) has a critical dependence, slows down the wakeup of the pair.

6. 6 Co-Designed Virtual Machine Concurrently design ISA, microarchitecture, and dynamic binary translation (DBT) system Examples -- Transmeta Crusoe & Efficeon processors; IBM DAISY, BOA. Our Design for x86: –RISC-style implementation ISA with fuse bit –Fetch straightened code generated by fast DBT –Run on an enhanced dynamic superscalar

7. 7 Implementation Instruction Set Allocate 1-bit of each instruction, the fuse bit, to fuse two instructions in the pipeline Dense Instruction Encoding: 16/32 bit instruction set design Features specialized for efficient emulation of the x86 ISA: long immediates, condition code, addressing modes etc

8. 8 Fused Instruction Set

9. 9 An Illustrative Example

10. 10 Dynamic Binary Translation Goals: Simple, Fast & Effective Hot Superblock detection and formation Translation from x86 binary to fused instruction set Code cache placement & linking among superblocks in the code cache

11. 11 Hot Superblock Detection & Formation Modified MRET (Most Recently Executed Tail) -- Stop at indirect jumps. Threshold: 32. Max Len: 256. a c b d d Early exit Entry Superblock generated later Translated Superblocks: Basic block A C B D Taken at superblock construction time Hot Threshold

12. 12 Translation Procedure Single Pass Algorithm: 1. Form superblocks using Modified MRET method 2. Crack x86 instructions into RISC-like abstract micro- ops 3. Perform Cluster Analysis of long immediates and assign to regs. 4. Generate micro-ops in the implementation ISA 5. Fusing Algorithm Scan looking for dependent pairs to be fused. Forward scan, backward pairing. 6. Assign registers; extend live ranges for precise traps, use consistent state mapping at superblock exits 7. Code generation

13. 13 Cluster Analysis Objectives: –Remove embedded long immediates in x86 binary. –Reduce static and dynamic instructions. Long Immediate Conversion. –Scan superblock looking for all long immediate values. –Perform value clustering analysis and allocate registers to frequent long immediate values. –Convert some x86 embedded long immeidates into register access or register plus a short immediate that can be handled in implementation ISA.

14. 14 Fusing Algorithm Objectives: –Maximize fused dependent pairs –Minimize non-fused single cycle ALU ops. Heuristics: –Only single cycle ALU ops can be a head. –Fuse instructions that are close in the original sequence cracked from x86 binary. Fusing Algorithm: –Single pass forward scan. –For each tail candidate, look backward in the scan for its head.

15. 15 Dependence Cycle Detection All cases are generalized in (d) due to Anti-Scan Fusing Heuristic

16. 16 Dynamic x86 Superblock Size Average superblock size is about 15 x86 instructions, 20+ RISC ops. String instructions are common in some x86 applications.

17. 17 Static Translation Size Variable length ISA is only about 33% bigger than x86 binary Fixed length ISA is 60% to 120% bigger than original x86 binary.

18. 18 Long Immediate Values Converted Intra superblock conversion for now. Address Displacement is easier to convert, but not the general long immediate values.

19. 19 Registers For Long Immediate Two or three registers are enough for 95+% dynamic superblocks. Most SPEC2000INT benchmarks need no more than 5 registers

20. 20 Scheduling Density Consistently high fusing rate across SPEC2000INT benchmarks. 1.5 Scheduling Density means more than 60% instructions are fused

21. 21 Non-Fused Instruction Profile Consistently low single cycle ALU leftovers across SPEC2000INT (~23%) X (~35%) means single cycle ALU ops are about 8% of all.

22. 22 Distance Distribution of Fused Pairs Most pairs are consecutive or very close in the original cracked RISC ops cracked from x86 superblock.

23. 23 Code Re-organization More than 50% pairs are across x86 instruction boundaries. Single cycle ALU ops pairs is about 60%

24. 24 Source Register Operands 99+% fusable pairs have no more than 3 source register operands. 95+% fusable pairs have no more than 2 source register operands.

25. 25 Conclusion High degree of fusing in typical x86 binary: 60% of all dynamic instructions Two source register operands are enough: 95% of fusable dependent pairs. Non-fused instructions are mostly LD, ST, BR, FP and NOPs –Little impact from pipelined issue Variable length ISA improves code density: by 30% in our case Co-Designed VM featuring fused instruction execution is promising  Future work: Complete the co-designed microarchitecture

26. 26 Backup: Dynamic Binary Translation Start program execution by interpretation; identify “hot” (frequently executed) program paths Translate hot paths into translation cache If program control flow reaches already translated code, execute natively Interpret Translate Native execution Threshold End of superblock Translation found DBT (VMM) Target translation found Not found (call- DBT instruction) End of superblock Translation not found