paper.tex 19 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395
  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.~Caselle$^a$,
  17. S.~Chilingaryan$^a$,
  18. T.~Dritschler$^a$,
  19. N.~Zilio$^a$,
  20. A.~Kopmann$^a$,
  21. M.~Balzer$^a$,
  22. M.~Weber$^a$\\
  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{% Modern physics experiments have reached multi-GB/s data rates.
  29. Fast data links and high performance computing stages are required for
  30. continuous data acquisition and processing. Because of their intrinsic
  31. parallelism and computational power, GPUs emerged as an ideal solution to
  32. process this data in high performance computing applications. In this paper
  33. we present a high-throughput platform based on direct FPGA-GPU
  34. communication. The architecture consists of a Direct Memory Access (DMA)
  35. engine compatible with the Xilinx PCI-Express core, a Linux driver for
  36. register access, and high-level software to manage direct memory transfers
  37. using AMD's DirectGMA technology. Measurements with a Gen\,3\,x8 link show a
  38. throughput of up to 6.4 GB/s. We also evaluated DirectGMA performance for low
  39. latency applications: preliminary results show a round-trip latency of 2
  40. \textmu s for data sizes up to 4 kB. Our implementation is suitable for real-
  41. time DAQ system applications ranging from photon science and medical imaging
  42. to High Energy Physics (HEP) trigger systems. }
  43. \keywords{FPGA; GPU; PCI-Express; OpenCL; DirectGMA}
  44. \begin{document}
  45. \ifdraft
  46. \setpagewiselinenumbers
  47. \linenumbers
  48. \fi
  49. \section{Introduction}
  50. GPU computing has become the main driving force for high performance computing
  51. due to an unprecedented parallelism and a low cost-benefit factor. GPU
  52. acceleration has found its way into numerous applications, ranging from
  53. simulation to image processing. Recent years have also seen an increasing
  54. interest in GPU-based systems for High Energy Physics (HEP) (\emph{e.g.}
  55. ATLAS~\cite{atlas_gpu}, ALICE~\cite{alice_gpu}, Mu3e~\cite{mu3e_gpu},
  56. PANDA~\cite{panda_gpu}) and photon science experiments.
  57. In a typical scenario, data are acquired by back-end readout systems and then
  58. transmitted in short bursts or in a continuous streaming mode to a computing
  59. stage.
  60. The data rates of bio-imaging or beam-monitoring experiments running in
  61. current generation photon science facilities have reached tens of
  62. GB/s~\cite{panda_gpu, atlas_gpu}. In order to collect data over long
  63. observation times, the readout architecture must be able to save. The
  64. throughput data transmission link may partially limit the overall system
  65. performance.
  66. Latency becomes the most stringent requirement for time-deterministic
  67. applications, \emph{e.g.} in Low/High-level trigger systems.
  68. Due to its high bandwidth and modularity, PCIe quickly became the commercial
  69. standard for connecting high-throughput peripherals such as GPUs or solid
  70. state disks. Moreover, optical PCIe networks have been demonstrated a decade
  71. ago~\cite{optical_pcie}, opening the possibility of using PCIe as a
  72. communication link over long distances.
  73. Several solutions for direct FPGA/GPU communication based on PCIe are reported
  74. in literature, and all of them are based on NVIDIA's GPUdirect technology. In
  75. the implementation of bittnerner and Ruf ~\cite{bittner} the GPU acts as
  76. master during an FPGA-to-GPU data transfer, reading data from the FPGA. This
  77. solution limits the reported bandwidth and latency to 514 MB/s and 40~\textmu
  78. s, respectively.
  79. %LR: FPGA^2 it's the name of their thing...
  80. When the FPGA is used as a master, a higher throughput can be achieved. An
  81. example of this approach is the FPGA\textsuperscript{2} framework by Thoma
  82. et~al.\cite{thoma}, which reaches 2454 MB/s using a 8x Gen2.0 data link.
  83. Lonardo et~al.\ achieved low latencies with their NaNet design, an FPGA-based
  84. PCIe network interface card~\cite{lonardo2015nanet}. The Gbe link however
  85. limits the latency performance of the system to a few tens of \textmu s. If
  86. only the FPGA-to-GPU latency is considered, the measured values span between
  87. 1~\textmu s and 6~\textmu s, depending on the datagram size. Moreover, the
  88. bandwidth saturates at 120 MB/s. Nieto et~al.\ presented a system based on a
  89. PXIexpress data link that makes use of four PCIe 1.0
  90. links~\cite{nieto2015high}. Their system (as limited by the interconnect)
  91. achieves an average throughput of 870 MB/s with 1 KB block transfers.
  92. In order to achieve the best performance in terms of latency and bandwidth, we
  93. developed a high-performance DMA engine based on Xilinx's PCIe Gen3 Core.
  94. To process the data, we encapsulated the DMA setup and memory mapping in a
  95. plugin for our scalable GPU processing framework~\cite{vogelgesang2012ufo}.
  96. This framework allows for an easy construction of streamed data processing on
  97. heterogeneous multi-GPU systems. The framework is based on OpenCL, and
  98. integration with NVIDIA's CUDA functions for GPUDirect technology is not
  99. possible.
  100. We therefore integrated direct FPGA-to-GPU communication into our processing
  101. pipeline using AMD's DirectGMA technology. In this paper we report the
  102. performance of our DMA engine for FPGA-to-CPU communication and the first
  103. preliminary results with DirectGMA technology.
  104. \section{Architecture}
  105. As shown in \figref{fig:trad-vs-dgpu} (a), traditional FPGA-GPU systems route
  106. data through system main memory by copying data from the FPGA into
  107. intermediate buffers and then finally into the GPU's main memory. Thus, the
  108. total throughput and latency of the system is limited by the main memory
  109. bandwidth. NVIDIA's GPUDirect and AMD's DirectGMA technologies allow direct
  110. communication between GPUs and auxiliary devices over PCIe. By combining this
  111. technology with DMA data transfers (see \figref{fig:trad-vs-dgpu} (b)), the
  112. overall latency of the system is reduced and total throughput increased.
  113. Moreover, the CPU and main system memory are relieved from processing because
  114. they are not directly involved in the data transfer anymore.
  115. \begin{figure}[t]
  116. \centering
  117. \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{figures/transf}
  118. \caption{%
  119. In a traditional DMA architecture (a), data are first written to the main
  120. system memory and then sent to the GPUs for final processing. By using
  121. GPUDirect/DirectGMA technology (b), the DMA engine has direct access to
  122. GPU's internal memory.
  123. }
  124. \label{fig:trad-vs-dgpu}
  125. \end{figure}
  126. \subsection{DMA engine implementation on the FPGA}
  127. We have developed a DMA architecture that minimizes resource utilization while
  128. maintaining the flexibility of a Scatter-Gather memory
  129. policy~\cite{rota2015dma}. The engine is compatible with the Xilinx PCIe
  130. Gen2/3 IP-Core~\cite{xilinxgen3} for Xilinx FPGA families 6 and 7. DMA
  131. transmissions to main system memory and GPU memory are both supported. Two
  132. FIFOs, with a data width of 256 bits and operating at 250 MHz, act as user-
  133. friendly interfaces with the custom logic with an input bandwidth of 7.45
  134. GB/s. The user logic and the DMA engine are configured by the host through PIO
  135. registers.
  136. The physical addresses of the host's memory buffers are stored into an internal
  137. memory and are dynamically updated by the driver or user, allowing highly
  138. efficient zero-copy data transfers. The maximum size associated with each
  139. address is 2 GB. The resource utilization
  140. on a Virtex 7 device is reported in \ref{table:utilization}.
  141. % Please add the following required packages to your document preamble:
  142. % \usepackage{booktabs}
  143. \begin{table}[]
  144. \centering
  145. \caption{Resource utilization on a Virtex7 device X240VT}
  146. \label{table:utilization}
  147. \begin{tabular}{@{}llll@{}}
  148. Resource & Utilization & Available & Utilization \% \\\hline
  149. LUT & 5331 & 433200 & 1.23 \\
  150. LUTRAM & 56 & 174200 & 0.03 \\
  151. FF & 5437 & 866400 & 0.63 \\
  152. BRAM & 20.50 & 1470 & 1.39 \\\hline
  153. \end{tabular}
  154. \end{table}
  155. \subsection{OpenCL management on host side}
  156. \label{sec:host}
  157. On the host side, AMD's DirectGMA technology, an implementation of the bus-
  158. addressable memory extension for OpenCL 1.1 and later, is used to write from
  159. the FPGA to GPU memory and from the GPU to the FPGA's control registers.
  160. \figref{fig:opencl-setup} illustrates the main mode of operation: to write
  161. into the GPU, the physical bus addresses of the GPU buffers are determined
  162. with a call to \texttt{clEnqueue\-Make\-Buffers\-Resident\-AMD} and set by the
  163. host CPU in a control register of the FPGA (1). The FPGA then writes data
  164. blocks autonomously in DMA fashion (2). Due to hardware restrictions the
  165. largest possible GPU buffer sizes are about 95 MB but larger transfers can be
  166. achieved by using a double buffering mechanism.
  167. Because the GPU provides a flat memory address space and our DMA engine allows
  168. multiple destination addresses to be set in advance, we can determine all
  169. addresses before the actual transfers thus keeping the CPU out of the transfer
  170. loop for data sizes less than 95 MB.
  171. To signal events to the FPGA (4), the control registers can be mapped into the
  172. GPU's address space passing a special AMD-specific flag and passing the
  173. physical BAR address of the FPGA configuration memory to the
  174. \texttt{cl\-Create\-Buffer} function. From the GPU, this memory is seen
  175. transparently as regular GPU memory and can be written accordingly (3). In our
  176. setup, trigger registers are used to notify the FPGA on successful or failed
  177. evaluation of the data.
  178. Using the \texttt{cl\-Enqueue\-Copy\-Buffer} function call it is possible to
  179. write entire memory regions in DMA fashion to the FPGA. In this case, the GPU
  180. acts as bus master and pushes data to the FPGA.
  181. \begin{figure}
  182. \centering
  183. \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{figures/opencl-setup}
  184. \caption{The FPGA writes to GPU memory by mapping the physical address of a
  185. GPU buffer and initating DMA transfers. Signalling happens in reverse order by
  186. mapping the FPGA control registers into the address space of the GPU.}
  187. \label{fig:opencl-setup}
  188. \end{figure}
  189. To process the data, we encapsulated the DMA setup and memory mapping in a
  190. plugin for our scalable GPU processing framework~\cite{vogelgesang2012ufo}.
  191. This framework allows for an easy construction of streamed data processing on
  192. heterogeneous multi-GPU systems. For example, to read data from the FPGA,
  193. decode from its specific data format and run a Fourier transform on the GPU as
  194. well as writing back the results to disk, one can run the following on the
  195. command line:
  196. \begin{verbatim}
  197. ufo-launch direct-gma ! decode ! fft ! write filename=out.raw
  198. \end{verbatim}
  199. The framework takes care of scheduling the tasks and distributing the data
  200. items to one or more GPUs. High throughput is achieved by the combination of
  201. fine- and coarse-grained data parallelism, \emph{i.e.} processing a single
  202. data item on a GPU using thousands of threads and by splitting the data stream
  203. and feeding individual data items to separate GPUs. None of this requires any
  204. user intervention and is solely determined by the framework in an automatized
  205. fashion. A complementary application programming interface allows users to
  206. develop custom applications written in C or high-level languages such as
  207. Python.
  208. \section{Results}
  209. We carried out performance measurements on a machine with an Intel Xeon
  210. E5-1630 at 3.7 GHz, Intel C612 chipset running openSUSE 13.1 with Linux
  211. 3.11.10. The Xilinx VC709 evaluation board was plugged into one of the PCIe
  212. 3.0 x8 slots. In case of FPGA-to-CPU data transfers, the software
  213. implementation is the one described in~\cite{rota2015dma}.
  214. \begin{figure}
  215. \centering
  216. \begin{subfigure}[b]{.49\textwidth}
  217. \centering
  218. \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/throughput}
  219. \caption{%
  220. DMA data transfer throughput.
  221. }
  222. \label{fig:throughput}
  223. \end{subfigure}
  224. \begin{subfigure}[b]{.49\textwidth}
  225. \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/latency}
  226. \caption{%
  227. Latency distribution.
  228. % for a single 4 KB packet transferred
  229. % from FPGA-to-CPU and FPGA-to-GPU.
  230. }
  231. \label{fig:latency}
  232. \end{subfigure}
  233. \caption{%
  234. Measured results for data transfers from FPGA to main memory
  235. (CPU) and from FPGA to the global GPU memory (GPU).
  236. }
  237. \end{figure}
  238. The measured results for the pure data throughput is shown in
  239. \figref{fig:throughput} for transfers from the FPGA to the system's main
  240. memory as well as to the global memory as explained in \ref{sec:host}. As one
  241. can see, in both cases the write performance is primarily limited by the PCIe
  242. bus. Higher payloads make up for the constant overhead thus increasing the net
  243. bandwidth. Up until 2 MB data transfer size, the throughput to the GPU is
  244. approaching slowly 100 MB/s. From there on, the throughput increases up to 6.4
  245. GB/s when PCIe bus saturation sets in at about 1 GB data size. The CPU
  246. throughput saturates earlier at about 30 MB but the maximum throughput is
  247. limited to about 6 GB/s losing about 6\% write performance.
  248. % We repeated the FPGA-to-GPU measurements on a low-end Supermicro X7SPA-HF-D525
  249. % system based on an Intel Atom CPU. The results showed no significant difference
  250. % compared to the previous setup. Depending on the application and computing
  251. % requirements, this result makes smaller acquisition system a cost-effective
  252. % alternative to larger workstations.
  253. % \begin{figure}
  254. % \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/intra-copy}
  255. % \caption{%
  256. % Throughput in MB/s for an intra-GPU data transfer of smaller block sizes
  257. % (4KB -- 24 MB) into a larger destination buffer (32 MB -- 128 MB). The lower
  258. % performance for smaller block sizes is caused by the larger amount of
  259. % transfers required to fill the destination buffer. The throughput has been
  260. % estimated using the host side wall clock time. The raw GPU data transfer as
  261. % measured per event profiling is about twice as fast.
  262. % }
  263. % \label{fig:intra-copy}
  264. % \end{figure}
  265. In order to write more than the maximum possible transfer size of 95 MB, we
  266. repeatedly wrote to the same sized buffer which is not possible in a real-
  267. world application. As a solution, we motivated the use of multiple copies in
  268. Section \ref{sec:host}. To verify that we can keep up with the incoming data
  269. throughput using this strategy, we measured the data throughput within a GPU
  270. by copying data from a smaller sized buffer representing the DMA buffer to a
  271. larger destination buffer. At a block size of about 384 KB the throughput
  272. surpasses the maximum possible PCIe bandwidth, and it reaches 40 GB/s for
  273. blocks bigger than 5 MB. Double buffering is therefore a viable solution for
  274. very large data transfers, where throughput performance is favoured over
  275. latency.
  276. % \figref{fig:intra-copy} shows the measured throughput for
  277. % three sizes and an increasing block size.
  278. For HEP experiments, low latencies are necessary to react in a reasonable time
  279. frame. In order to measure the latency caused by the communication overhead we
  280. conducted the following protocol: 1) the host issues continuous data transfers
  281. of a 4 KB buffer that is initialized with a fixed value to the FPGA using the
  282. \texttt{cl\-Enqueue\-Copy\-Buffer} call. 2) when the FPGA receives data in its
  283. input FIFO it moves it directly to the output FIFO which feeds the outgoing
  284. DMA engine thus pushing back the data to the GPU. 3) At some point, the host
  285. enables generation of data different from initial value which also starts an
  286. internal FPGA counter with 4 ns resolution. 4) When the generated data is
  287. received again at the FPGA, the counter is stopped. 5) The host program reads
  288. out the counter values and computes the round-trip latency. The distribution
  289. of 10000 measurements of the one-way latency is shown in \figref{fig:latency}.
  290. The GPU latency has a mean value of 84.38 \textmu s and a standard variation
  291. of 6.34 \textmu s. This is 9.73 \% slower than the CPU latency of 76.89
  292. \textmu s that was measured using the same driver and measuring procedure. The
  293. non-Gaussian distribution with two distinct peaks indicates a systemic
  294. influence that we cannot control and is most likely caused by the non-
  295. deterministic run-time behaviour of the operating system scheduler.
  296. \section{Conclusion and outlook}
  297. We developed a hardware and software solution that enables DMA transfers
  298. between FPGA-based readout systems and GPU computing clusters. The software
  299. solution that we proposed allows seamless multi-GPU processing of the incoming
  300. data, due to the integration in our streamed computing framework. This allows
  301. straightforward integration with different DAQ systems and introduction of
  302. custom data processing algorithms.
  303. The net throughput is primarily limited by the PCIe link, reaching 6.4 GB/s
  304. for a FPGA-to-GPU data transfer and 6.6 GB/s for a FPGA-to-CPU data transfer.
  305. By writing directly into GPU memory instead of routing data through system
  306. main memory, the overall latency of the system can be reduced, thus allowing
  307. close massively parallel computation on GPUs. Optimization of the GPU DMA
  308. interfacing code is ongoing with the help of technical support by AMD. With a
  309. better understanding of the hardware and software aspects of DirectGMA, we
  310. expect a significant improvement in the latency performance.
  311. In order to increase the total throughput, a custom FPGA evaluation board is
  312. currently under development. The board mounts a Virtex-7 chip and features two
  313. fully populated FMC connectors, a 119 Gb/s DDR memory interface and a PCIe x16
  314. Gen3 connection. Two x8 Gen3 cores, instantiated on the board, will be mapped
  315. as a single x16 device by using an external PCIe switch. With two cores
  316. operating in parallel, we foresee an increase in the data throughput by a
  317. factor of 2 (as demonstrated in~\cite{rota2015dma}).
  318. Support for NVIDIA's GPUDirect technology is also foreseen in the next months
  319. to lift the limitation of one specific GPU vendor and compare the performance
  320. of hardware by different vendors. Further improvements are expected by
  321. generalizing the transfer mechanism and include Infiniband support besides the
  322. existing PCIe connection.
  323. %% Where do we get this values? Any reference?
  324. %This allows
  325. %speeds of up to 290 Gb/s and latencies as low as 0.5 \textmu s.
  326. Our goal is to develop a unique hybrid solution, based on commercial standards,
  327. that includes fast data transmission protocols and a high performance GPU
  328. computing framework.
  329. \acknowledgments
  330. This work was partially supported by the German-Russian BMBF funding programme,
  331. grant numbers 05K10CKB and 05K10VKE.
  332. \bibliographystyle{JHEP}
  333. \bibliography{literature}
  334. \end{document}