Adjacency lists are frequently used in graphing or map based applications. Although efficient concurrent linked-list algorithms are well known, it can be difficult to adapt these approaches to build a high-performance adjacency list. Furthermore, it can often be desirable to execute operations in these data structures transactionally, or perform a sequence of operations in one atomic step. In this paper, we present a lock-free transactional adjacency list based on a multi-dimensional list (MDList). We are able to combine known linked list strategies with the capability of the MDList in order to efficiently organize graph vertexes and their edges. We design our underlying data structure to be node-based and linearizable, then use the Lock-Free Transactional Transformation (LFTT) methodology to efficiently enable transactional execution. In our performance evaluation, our lock-free transactional adjacency list achieves an average of 50 speedup over a transactional boosting implementation.
Initial performance experiments were performed with Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) by @cite_1 . Intel introduced Transactional Synchronization Extensions (TSX) to the x86 instruction set architecture of the Intel 4th Generation Core Processors @cite_3 . IBM introduced HTM in the Power ISA @cite_14 . Both implementations offer a best-effort HTM, which means that there is no guarantee provided that a hardware transaction will commit to memory. The disadvantage of a best-effort strategy is that HTM may experience frequent aborts due to data access conflicts, hardware interrupts, limited transactional resources, or false sharing due to unrelated variables mapping to the same cache line @cite_9 .
@cite_9 @cite_14 @cite_1 @cite_3
1979330015 1978896667 2189254265 2100091242
Intel has recently introduced Intel® Transactional Synchronization Extensions (Intel® TSX) in the Intel 4th Generation Core™ Processors. With Intel TSX, a processor can dynamically determine whether threads need to serialize through lock-protected critical sections. In this paper, we evaluate the first hardware implementation of Intel TSX using a set of high-performance computing (HPC) workloads, and demonstrate that applying Intel TSX to these workloads can provide significant performance improvements. On a set of real-world HPC workloads, applying Intel TSX provides an average speedup of 1.41x. When applied to a parallel user-level TCP IP stack, Intel TSX provides 1.31x average bandwidth improvement on network intensive applications. We also demonstrate the ease with which we were able to apply Intel TSX to the various workloads. The Intel Haswell processor includes restricted transactional memory (RTM), which is the first commodity-based hardware transactional memory (HTM) to become publicly available. However, like other real HTMs, such as IBM's Blue Gene Q, Haswell's RTM is best-effort, meaning it provides no transactional forward progress guarantees. Because of this, a software fallback system must be used in conjunction with Haswell's RTM to ensure transactional programs execute to completion. To complicate matters, Haswell does not provide escape actions. Without escape actions, non-transactional instructions cannot be executed within the context of a hardware transaction, thereby restricting the ways in which a software fallback can interact with the HTM. As such, the challenge of creating a scalable hybrid TM (HyTM) that uses Haswell's RTM and a software TM (STM) fallback is exacerbated. In this paper, we present Invyswell, a novel HyTM that exploits the benefits and manages the limitations of Haswell's RTM. After describing Invyswell's design, we show that it outperforms NOrec, a state-of-the-art STM, by 35 , Hybrid NOrec, NOrec's hybrid implementation, by 18 , and Haswell's hardware-only lock elision by 25 across all STAMP benchmarks. Transactional Lock Elision (TLE) uses Hardware Transactional Memory (HTM) to execute unmodified critical sections concurrently, even if they are protected by the same lock. To ensure correctness, the transactions used to execute these critical sections “subscribe” to the lock by reading it and checking that it is available. A recent paper proposed using the tempting “lazy subscription” optimization for a similar technique in a different context, namely transactional systems that use a single global lock (SGL) to protect all transactional data. We identify several pitfalls that show that lazy subscription is not safe for TLE because unmodified critical sections executing before subscribing to the lock may behave incorrectly in a number of subtle ways. We also show that recently proposed compiler support for modifying transaction code to ensure subscription occurs before any incorrect behavior could manifest is not sufficient to avoid all of the pitfalls we identify. We further argue that extending such compiler support to avoid all pitfalls would add substantial complexity and would usually limit the extent to which subscription can be deferred, undermining the effectiveness of the optimization. Hardware extensions suggested in the recent proposal also do not address all of the pitfalls we identify. A longer version of this paper proposes hardware extensions that make lazy subscription safe, both for SGL-based transactional systems and for TLE, without the need for special compiler support. We report on our experience with the hardware transactional memory (HTM) feature of two pre-production revisions of a new commercial multicore processor. Our experience includes a number of promising results using HTM to improve performance in a variety of contexts, and also identifies some ways in which the feature could be improved to make it even better. We give detailed accounts of our experiences, sharing techniques we used to achieve the results we have, as well as describing challenges we faced in doing so.