Ian Rudolf Bratt
Tilera
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Ian Rudolf Bratt.
international symposium on computer architecture | 2004
Michael Bedford Taylor; James Psota; Arvind Saraf; Nathan Shnidman; Volker Strumpen; Matthew I. Frank; Saman P. Amarasinghe; Anant Agarwal; Walter Lee; Jason E. Miller; David Wentzlaff; Ian Rudolf Bratt; Ben Greenwald; Henry Hoffmann; Paul Johnson; Jason Kim
This paper evaluates the Raw microprocessor. Raw addresses the challenge of building a general-purpose architecture that performs well on a larger class of stream and embedded computing applications than existing microprocessors, while still running existing ILP-based sequential programs with reasonable performance in the face of increasing wire delays. Raw approaches this challenge by implementing plenty of on-chip resources - including logic, wires, and pins - in a tiled arrangement, and exposing them through a new ISA, so that the software can take advantage of these resources for parallel applications. Raw supports both ILP and streams by routing operands between architecturally-exposed functional units over a point-to-point scalar operand network. This network offers low latency for scalar data transport. Raw manages the effect of wire delays by exposing the interconnect and using software to orchestrate both scalar and stream data transport. We have implemented a prototype Raw microprocessor in IBMs 180 nm, 6-layer copper, CMOS 7SF standard-cell ASIC process. We have also implemented ILP and stream compilers. Our evaluation attempts to determine the extent to which Raw succeeds in meeting its goal of serving as a more versatile, general-purpose processor. Central to achieving this goal is Raws ability to exploit all forms of parallelism, including ILP, DLP, TLP, and Stream parallelism. Specifically, we evaluate the performance of Raw on a diverse set of codes including traditional sequential programs, streaming applications, server workloads and bit-level embedded computation. Our experimental methodology makes use of a cycle-accurate simulator validated against our real hardware. Compared to a 180nm Pentium-III, using commodity PC memory system components, Raw performs within a factor of 2/spl times/ for sequential applications with a very low degree of ILP, about 2/spl times/ to 9/spl times/ better for higher levels of ILP, and 10/spl times/-100/spl times/ better when highly parallel applications are coded in a stream language or optimized by hand. The paper also proposes a new versatility metric and uses it to discuss the generality of Raw.
Archive | 2009
Michael Bedford Taylor; Walter Lee; Jason E. Miller; David Wentzlaff; Ian Rudolf Bratt; Ben Greenwald; Henry Hoffmann; Paul Johnson; Jason Kim; James Psota; Arvind Saraf; Nathan Shnidman; Volker Strumpen; Matthew I. Frank; Saman P. Amarasinghe; Anant Agarwal
For the last few decades Moore’s Law has continually provided exponential growth in the number of transistors on a single chip. This chapter describes a class of architectures, called tiled multicore architectures, that are designed to exploit massive quantities of on-chip resources in an efficient, scalable manner. Tiled multicore architectures combine each processor core with a switch to create a modular element called a tile. Tiles are replicated on a chip as needed to create multicores with any number of tiles. The Raw processor, a pioneering example of a tiled multicore processor, is examined in detail to explain the philosophy, design, and strengths of such architectures. Raw addresses the challenge of building a general-purpose architecture that performs well on a larger class of stream and embedded computing applications than existing microprocessors, while still running existing ILP-based sequential programs with reasonable performance. Central to achieving this goal is Raw’s ability to exploit all forms of parallelism, including ILP, DLP, TLP, and Stream parallelism. Raw approaches this challenge by implementing plenty of on-chip resources – including logic, wires, and pins – in a tiled arrangement, and exposing them through a new ISA, so that the software can take advantage of these resources for parallel applications. Compared to a traditional superscalar processor, Raw performs within a factor of 2x for sequential applications with a very low degree of ILP, about 2x–9x better for higher levels of ILP, and 10x–100x better when highly parallel applications are coded in a stream language or optimized by hand.
Archive | 2007
Anant Agarwal; Ian Rudolf Bratt; Matthew Mattina
Archive | 2011
Patrick Robert Griffin; Mathew Hostetter; Anant Agarwal; Chyi-Chang Miao; Christopher D. Metcalf; Bruce Edwards; Carl G. Ramey; Mark B. Rosenbluth; David Wentzlaff; Christopher J. Jackson; Ben Harrison; Kenneth Steele; John Amann; Shane Bell; Richard Conlin; Kevin Joyce; Christine Deignan; Liewei Bao; Matthew Mattina; Ian Rudolf Bratt; Richard Schooler
Archive | 2008
Liewei Bao; Ian Rudolf Bratt
Archive | 2010
Chyi-Chang Miao; Christopher D. Metcalf; Ian Rudolf Bratt; Carl G. Ramey
Archive | 2004
Rodric M. Rabbah; Ian Rudolf Bratt; Krste Asanovic; Anant Agarwal
Archive | 2010
Ian Rudolf Bratt; Carl G. Ramey; Matthew Mattina
Archive | 2010
Chyi-Chang Miao; Christopher D. Metcalf; Ian Rudolf Bratt; Carl G. Ramey
Archive | 2010
Ian Rudolf Bratt; Carl G. Ramey; Matthew Mattina