paper.tex 18 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379
  1. \documentclass{JINST}
  2. \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
  3. \usepackage{lineno}
  4. \usepackage{ifthen}
  5. \usepackage{caption}
  6. \usepackage{subcaption}
  7. \usepackage{textcomp}
  8. \newboolean{draft}
  9. \setboolean{draft}{true}
  10. \newcommand{\figref}[1]{Figure~\ref{#1}}
  11. \title{A high-throughput readout architecture based on PCI-Express Gen3 and DirectGMA technology}
  12. \author{
  13. L.~Rota$^a$,
  14. M.~Vogelgesang$^a$,
  15. L.E.~Ardila Perez$^a$,
  16. M.~Balzer$^a$,
  17. M.~Caselle$^a$,
  18. S.~Chilingaryan$^a$,
  19. A.~Kopmann$^a$,
  20. T.~Dritschler$^a$,
  21. M.~Weber$^a$\\
  22. N.~Zilio$^a$,
  23. \llap{$^a$}Institute for Data Processing and Electronics,\\
  24. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT),\\
  25. Herrmann-von-Helmholtz-Platz 1, Karlsruhe, Germany \\
  26. E-mail: \email{lorenzo.rota@kit.edu}, \email{matthias.vogelgesang@kit.edu}
  27. }
  28. \abstract{%
  29. Modern physics experiments have reached multi-GB/s data rates. Fast data
  30. links and high performance computing stages are required for continuous data
  31. acquisition and processing. Because of their intrinsic parallelism and
  32. computational power, GPUs emerged as an ideal solution to process this data in
  33. high performance computing applications. In this paper we present a
  34. high-throughput platform based on direct FPGA-GPU communication.
  35. The architecture consists of a
  36. Direct Memory Access (DMA) engine compatible with the Xilinx PCI-Express core,
  37. a Linux driver for register access, and high-level software to manage direct
  38. memory transfers using AMD's DirectGMA technology. Preliminary measurements with a Gen3
  39. x8 link show a throughput of up to 6.4 GB/s and a latency of 40 \textmu s.
  40. Our implementation is suitable for real-time DAQ system applications ranging
  41. from photon science and medical imaging to High Energy Physics (HEP) trigger
  42. systems.
  43. }
  44. \keywords{FPGA; GPU; PCI-Express; OpenCL; DirectGMA}
  45. \begin{document}
  46. \ifdraft
  47. \setpagewiselinenumbers
  48. \linenumbers
  49. \fi
  50. \section{Introduction}
  51. GPU computing has become the main driving force for high performance computing
  52. due to an unprecedented parallelism and a low cost-benefit factor. GPU
  53. acceleration has found its way into numerous applications, ranging from
  54. simulation to image processing. Recent years have also seen an increasing
  55. interest in GPU-based systems for High Energy Physics (HEP) experiments
  56. (\emph{e.g.} ATLAS~\cite{atlas_gpu}, ALICE~\cite{alice_gpu},
  57. Mu3e~\cite{mu3e_gpu}, PANDA~\cite{panda_gpu}). In a typical HEP scenario, data
  58. are acquired by back-end readout systems and then transmitted in short bursts or
  59. in a continuous streaming mode to a computing stage.
  60. With expected data rates of several GB/s, the data transmission link may
  61. partially limit the overall system performance. In particular, latency becomes
  62. the most stringent requirement for time-deterministic applications, \emph{e.g.}
  63. in Low/High-level trigger systems. Furthermore, the amount of data produced in
  64. current generation photon science facilities have become comparable to those
  65. traditionally associated with HEP.
  66. Due to its high bandwidth and modularity,
  67. PCIe quickly became the commercial standard for connecting high-throughput
  68. peripherals such as GPUs or solid state disks.Moreover, optical PCIe networks have been demonstrated a decade ago~\cite{optical_pcie}, opening the possibility of using PCIe as a communication bus over long distances.
  69. Several solutions for direct FPGA/GPU communication based on PCIe are reported
  70. in literature, and all of them are based on NVIDIA's GPUdirect technology.
  71. In the implementation of Bittner and Ruf ~\cite{bittner} the GPU acts as master
  72. during an FPGA-to-GPU data transfer, reading data from the FPGA. This solution
  73. limits the reported bandwidth and latency to 514 MB/s and 40~\textmu s,
  74. respectively.
  75. %LR: FPGA^2 it's the name of their thing...
  76. When the FPGA is used as a master, a higher throughput can be achieved. An
  77. example of this approach is the FPGA\textsuperscript{2}
  78. framework by Thoma et~al.\cite{thoma}, which reaches 2454 MB/s using a 8x Gen2.0
  79. data link.
  80. Lonardo et~al.\ achieved low latencies with their NaNet design, an FPGA-based
  81. PCIe network interface card~\cite{lonardo2015nanet}. The Gbe link however
  82. limits the latency performance of the system to a few tens of \textmu s. If only
  83. the FPGA-to-GPU latency is considered, the measured values span between
  84. 1~\textmu s and 6~\textmu s, depending on the datagram size. Moreover, the
  85. bandwidth saturates at 120 MB/s.
  86. Nieto et~al.\ presented a system based on a PXIexpress data link that makes use
  87. of four PCIe 1.0 links~\cite{nieto2015high}.
  88. Their system (as limited by the interconnect) achieves an average throughput of
  89. 870 MB/s with 1 KB block transfers.
  90. In order to achieve the best performance in terms of latency and bandwidth,
  91. we developed a high-performance DMA engine based on Xilinx's PCIe Gen3 Core.
  92. To process the data, we encapsulated the DMA setup and memory mapping in a
  93. plugin for our scalable GPU processing framework~\cite{vogelgesang2012ufo}. This
  94. framework allows for an easy construction of streamed data processing on
  95. heterogeneous multi-GPU systems. However, the framework is based on OpenCL,
  96. and therefore integration with NVIDIA's CUDA functions for GPUDirect technology
  97. is not possible.
  98. We therefore integrated direct FPGA-to-GPU communication into our processing pipeline
  99. using AMD's DirectGMA technology. In this paper we report the performance of our
  100. DMA engine for FPGA-to-CPU communication and the first preliminary results with
  101. DirectGMA technology.
  102. \section{Architecture}
  103. As shown in \figref{fig:trad-vs-dgpu} (a), traditional FPGA-GPU systems route
  104. data through system main memory by copying data from the FPGA into intermediate
  105. buffers and then finally into the GPU's main memory.
  106. Thus, the total throughput and latency of the system is limited by the main
  107. memory bandwidth. NVIDIA's GPUDirect and AMD's DirectGMA technologies allow
  108. direct communication between GPUs and auxiliary devices over the PCIe bus.
  109. By combining this technology with DMA data transfers (see \figref{fig:trad-vs-dgpu} (b)),
  110. the overall latency of the system is reduced and total throughput increased.
  111. Moreover, the CPU and main system memory are relieved from processing because
  112. they are not directly involved in the data transfer anymore.
  113. \begin{figure}[t]
  114. \centering
  115. \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{figures/transf}
  116. \caption{%
  117. In a traditional DMA architecture (a), data are first written to the main
  118. system memory and then sent to the GPUs for final processing. By using
  119. GPUDirect/DirectGMA technology (b), the DMA engine has direct access to
  120. GPU's internal memory.
  121. }
  122. \label{fig:trad-vs-dgpu}
  123. \end{figure}
  124. \subsection{DMA engine implementation on the FPGA}
  125. We have developed a DMA architecture that minimizes resource utilization while
  126. maintaining the flexibility of a Scatter-Gather memory
  127. policy~\cite{rota2015dma}. The engine is compatible with the Xilinx PCIe Gen2/3
  128. IP-Core~\cite{xilinxgen3} for Xilinx FPGA families 6 and 7. DMA transmissions to
  129. main system memory and GPU memory are both supported. Two FIFOs, with a data
  130. width of 256 bits and operating at 250 MHz, act as user-friendly interfaces with
  131. the custom logic with an input bandwidth of 7.45 GB/s. The user logic and the DMA
  132. engine are configured by the host through PIO registers.
  133. The physical addresses of the host's memory buffers are stored into an internal
  134. memory and are dynamically updated by the driver or user, allowing highly
  135. efficient zero-copy data transfers. The maximum size associated with each
  136. address is 2 GB. The resource utilization
  137. on a Virtex 7 device is reported in \ref{table:utilization}.
  138. % Please add the following required packages to your document preamble:
  139. % \usepackage{booktabs}
  140. \begin{table}[]
  141. \centering
  142. \caption{Resource utilization on}
  143. \label{table:utilization}
  144. \begin{tabular}{@{}llll@{}}
  145. Resource & Utilization & Available & Utilization \% \\\hline
  146. LUT & 5331 & 433200 & 1.23 \\
  147. LUTRAM & 56 & 174200 & 0.03 \\
  148. FF & 5437 & 866400 & 0.63 \\
  149. BRAM & 20.50 & 1470 & 1.39 \\\hline
  150. \end{tabular}
  151. \end{table}
  152. \subsection{OpenCL management on host side}
  153. \label{sec:host}
  154. On the host side, AMD's DirectGMA technology, an implementation of the
  155. bus-addressable memory extension for OpenCL 1.1 and later, is used to write from
  156. the FPGA to GPU memory and from the GPU to the FPGA's control registers.
  157. \figref{fig:opencl-setup} illustrates the main mode of operation: to write into
  158. the GPU, the physical bus addresses of the GPU buffers are determined with a call to
  159. \texttt{clEnqueue\-Make\-Buffers\-Resident\-AMD} and set by the host CPU in a
  160. control register of the FPGA (1). The FPGA then writes data blocks autonomously
  161. in DMA fashion (2).
  162. Due to hardware restrictions the largest possible GPU buffer sizes are about 95
  163. MB but larger transfers can be achieved by using a double buffering mechanism.
  164. Because the GPU provides a flat memory address space and our DMA engine allows
  165. multiple destination addresses to be set in advance, we can determine all
  166. addresses before the actual transfers thus keeping the CPU out of the transfer
  167. loop for data sizes less than 95 MB.
  168. To signal events to the FPGA (4), the control registers can be mapped into the
  169. GPU's address space passing a special AMD-specific flag and passing the physical
  170. BAR address of the FPGA configuration memory to the \texttt{cl\-Create\-Buffer}
  171. function. From the GPU, this memory is seen transparently as regular GPU memory
  172. and can be written accordingly (3). In our setup, trigger registers are used to
  173. notify the FPGA on successful or failed evaluation of the data.
  174. Using the \texttt{cl\-Enqueue\-Copy\-Buffer} function call it is possible
  175. to write entire memory regions in DMA fashion to the FPGA.
  176. In this case, the GPU acts as bus master and pushes data to the FPGA.
  177. \begin{figure}
  178. \centering
  179. \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{figures/opencl-setup}
  180. \caption{The FPGA writes to GPU memory by mapping the physical address of a
  181. GPU buffer and initating DMA transfers. Signalling happens in reverse order by
  182. mapping the FPGA control registers into the address space of the GPU.}
  183. \label{fig:opencl-setup}
  184. \end{figure}
  185. To process the data, we encapsulated the DMA setup and memory mapping in a
  186. plugin for our scalable GPU processing framework~\cite{vogelgesang2012ufo}. This
  187. framework allows for an easy construction of streamed data processing on
  188. heterogeneous multi-GPU systems. For example, to read data from the FPGA, decode
  189. from its specific data format and run a Fourier transform on the GPU as well as
  190. writing back the results to disk, one can run the following on the command line:
  191. \begin{verbatim}
  192. ufo-launch direct-gma ! decode ! fft ! write filename=out.raw
  193. \end{verbatim}
  194. The framework takes care of scheduling the tasks and distributing the data items
  195. to one or more GPUs. High throughput is achieved by the combination of fine-
  196. and coarse-grained data parallelism, \emph{i.e.} processing a single data item
  197. on a GPU using thousands of threads and by splitting the data stream and feeding
  198. individual data items to separate GPUs. None of this requires any user
  199. intervention and is solely determined by the framework in an automatized
  200. fashion. A complementary application programming interface allows users to
  201. develop custom applications written in C or high-level languages such as Python.
  202. \section{Results}
  203. We carried out performance measurements on a machine with an Intel Xeon E5-1630
  204. at 3.7 GHz, Intel C612 chipset running openSUSE 13.1 with Linux 3.11.10. The
  205. Xilinx VC709 evaluation board was plugged into one of the PCIe 3.0 x8 slots.
  206. In case of FPGA-to-CPU data transfers, the software implementation is the one
  207. described in~\cite{rota2015dma}.
  208. \begin{figure}
  209. \centering
  210. \begin{subfigure}[b]{.49\textwidth}
  211. \centering
  212. \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/throughput}
  213. \caption{%
  214. DMA data transfer throughput.
  215. }
  216. \label{fig:throughput}
  217. \end{subfigure}
  218. \begin{subfigure}[b]{.49\textwidth}
  219. \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/latency}
  220. \caption{%
  221. Latency distribution.
  222. % for a single 4 KB packet transferred
  223. % from FPGA-to-CPU and FPGA-to-GPU.
  224. }
  225. \label{fig:latency}
  226. \end{subfigure}
  227. \caption{%
  228. Measured results for data transfers from FPGA to main memory
  229. (CPU) and from FPGA to the global GPU memory (GPU).
  230. }
  231. \end{figure}
  232. The measured results for the pure data throughput is shown in
  233. \figref{fig:throughput} for transfers from the FPGA to the system's main memory
  234. as well as to the global memory as explained in \ref{sec:host}. As one can see,
  235. in both cases the write performance is primarily limited by the PCIe bus. Higher
  236. payloads make up for the constant overhead thus increasing the net bandwidth. Up
  237. until 2 MB data transfer size, the throughput to the GPU is approaching slowly
  238. 100 MB/s. From there on, the throughput increases up to 6.4 GB/s when PCIe bus
  239. saturation sets in at about 1 GB data size.
  240. The CPU throughput saturates earlier at about 30 MB but the maximum throughput
  241. is limited to about 6 GB/s losing about 6\% write performance.
  242. We repeated the FPGA-to-GPU measurements on a low-end Supermicro X7SPA-HF-D525
  243. system based on an Intel Atom CPU. The results showed no significant difference
  244. compared to the previous setup. Depending on the application and computing
  245. requirements, this result makes smaller acquisition system a cost-effective
  246. alternative to larger workstations.
  247. \begin{figure}
  248. \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/intra-copy}
  249. \caption{%
  250. Throughput in MB/s for an intra-GPU data transfer of smaller block sizes
  251. (4KB -- 24 MB) into a larger destination buffer (32 MB -- 128 MB). The lower
  252. performance for smaller block sizes is caused by the larger amount of
  253. transfers required to fill the destination buffer. The throughput has been
  254. estimated using the host side wall clock time. The raw GPU data transfer as
  255. measured per event profiling is about twice as fast.
  256. }
  257. \label{fig:intra-copy}
  258. \end{figure}
  259. In order to write more than the maximum possible transfer size of 95 MB, we
  260. repeatedly wrote to the same sized buffer which is not possible in a real-world
  261. application. As a solution, we motivated the use of multiple copies in Section
  262. \ref{sec:host}. To verify that we can keep up with the incoming data throughput
  263. using this strategy, we measured the data throughput within a GPU by copying
  264. data from a smaller sized buffer representing the DMA buffer to a larger
  265. destination buffer. \figref{fig:intra-copy} shows the measured throughput for
  266. three sizes and an increasing block size. At a block size of about 384 KB, the
  267. throughput surpasses the maximum possible PCIe bandwidth, thus making a double
  268. buffering strategy a viable solution for very large data transfers.
  269. For HEP experiments, low latencies are necessary to react in a reasonable time
  270. frame. In order to measure the latency caused by the communication overhead we
  271. conducted the following protocol: 1) the host issues continuous data transfers
  272. of a 4 KB buffer that is initialized with a fixed value to the FPGA using the
  273. \texttt{cl\-Enqueue\-Copy\-Buffer} call. 2) when the FPGA receives data in its
  274. input FIFO it moves it directly to the output FIFO which feeds the outgoing DMA
  275. engine thus pushing back the data to the GPU. 3) At some point, the host
  276. enables generation of data different from initial value which also starts an
  277. internal FPGA counter with 4 ns resolution. 4) When the generated data is
  278. received again at the FPGA, the counter is stopped. 5) The host program reads
  279. out the counter values and computes the round-trip latency. The distribution of
  280. 10000 measurements of the one-way latency is shown in \figref{fig:latency}. The
  281. GPU latency has a mean value of 84.38 \textmu s and a standard variation of
  282. 6.34 \textmu s. This is 9.73 \% slower than the CPU latency of 76.89 \textmu s
  283. that was measured using the same driver and measuring procedure. The
  284. non-Gaussian distribution with two distinct peaks indicates a systemic influence
  285. that we cannot control and is most likely caused by the non-deterministic
  286. run-time behaviour of the operating system scheduler.
  287. \section{Conclusion and outlook}
  288. We developed a hardware and software solution that enables DMA
  289. transfers between FPGA-based readout boards and GPU computing clusters.
  290. The software solution that we proposed allows seamless multi-GPU
  291. processing of the incoming data, due to the integration in our streamed computing
  292. framework. This allows straightforward integration with different DAQ systems
  293. and introduction of custom data processing algorithms.
  294. The net throughput is primarily limited by the PCIe bus, reaching 6.4 GB/s
  295. for a FPGA-to-GPU data transfer and 6.6 GB/s for a FPGA-to-CPU data transfer.
  296. By writing directly into GPU memory instead of routing data through system
  297. main memory, the overall latency can be reduced, thus allowing close massively
  298. parallel computation on GPUs.
  299. Optimization of the GPU DMA interfacing code is ongoing with the help of
  300. technical support by AMD. With a better understanding of the hardware and
  301. software aspects of DirectGMA, we expect a significant improvement in the latency
  302. performance.
  303. In order to increase the total throughput, a custom FPGA evaluation board is
  304. currently under development. The board mounts a Virtex-7 chip and features two
  305. fully populated FMC connectors, a 119 Gb/s DDR memory interface and a PCIe Gen3
  306. x16 connection. Two PCIe x8 cores, instantiated on the board, will be mapped as
  307. a single x16 device by using an external PCIe switch. With two cores operating
  308. in parallel, we foresee an increase in the data throughput by a factor of 2 (as
  309. demonstrated in~\cite{rota2015dma}).
  310. Support for NVIDIA's GPUDirect technology is also foreseen in the next months to
  311. lift the limitation of one specific GPU vendor and compare the performance of hardware by
  312. different vendors.
  313. Further improvements are expected by generalizing the transfer mechanism and
  314. include Infiniband support besides the existing PCIe connection.
  315. %% Where do we get this values? Any reference?
  316. %This allows
  317. %speeds of up to 290 Gb/s and latencies as low as 0.5 \textmu s.
  318. Our goal is to develop a unique hybrid solution, based on commercial standards,
  319. that includes fast data transmission protocols and a high performance GPU
  320. computing framework.
  321. \acknowledgments
  322. This work was partially supported by the German-Russian BMBF funding programme,
  323. grant numbers 05K10CKB and 05K10VKE.
  324. \bibliographystyle{JHEP}
  325. \bibliography{literature}
  326. \end{document}