International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
NOC: QOS METRICS
MODELLING AND ANALYSIS BASED ON DYNAMIC
ROUTING.
Abdelkader SAADAOUI1, Salem NASRI1,2
1
CES-Lab, ENIS, Sfax, Tunisia
[email protected]
2
College of computer, Qassim University, KSA
[email protected],
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
Increasing heterogeneous software and hardware blocks constitute complex ICs known as System on
Chip (SoC). These blocks are conceived as intellectual property (IP) cores. Designers are developing
SoCs by using IP cores reuse, which include interconnection architecture and interface to peripheral
devices.Because of the SoC growing complexity, some researchers tend to concentrate more on the
communication rather than the computation aspect. This area of research has leading to the Network on
Chip (NoC) Concepts.The research domain of NoC has many applications needing high communication
performances. Therefore NoC offers attractive solutions to these applications.One of the goals of NoC
technology is to maintain a required Quality of Service (QoS), defined in terms of acceptable parameters
values.This paper proposes a presentation of QoS metrics model based on QoS parameters such as Endto-End Delays (EED) and throughputs (Thp), for different applications. This study is based on dynamic
routing simulation of a 4x4 mesh NoC behaviour under three communications processes namely TCP,
VBR and CBR.
KEYWORDS
NoC, QoS, Dynamic Routing, End-to-End Delay, Throughput, TCP, VBR, CBR.
1. Introduction:
According to ITRS roadmap, the scaling of physical gate length of transistor is reaching less
than 10 nm with increasing gap between relative delay of communication (global wire) and
computation (gate delay), Figures 1 and 2, [1, 2, 3].
Figure 1: ITRS Roadmap Acceleration
Continues-Gate Length Trends
DOI : 10.5121/ijdps.2012.3204
Figure 2: Relative delay for wire and gate
vs near future Technologies.
43
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
Network on Chip (NoC), as a new SoC paradigm, is useful by handling parallelism,
manufacturing complexity, wiring problems and reliability [4, 5, 6]. Researchers have used
techniques such as routing and packet-switching concepts of computer networks into a chip [7].
As described in [8, 9, 10, 11], NoCs are emerging as attractive solutions to the existing
interconnection constraints implementing future high performance networks and more suitable
QoS managements.
Historically, NoC has for origin multi-processors networks [12]. In 1983, transputers permitted
the realisation of some parallel machines. In 2000, SPIN (LIP6) constituted the first study of
NoC packets commutation using NS2 and systemC tools for simulation. After 2002, researchers
have concentrated their effort on bandwidth and latency to guarantee the traffic and to
interconnect IPs in the network. Then clock problems were considered. From 2004, many
methods and tools of decision (topology, size of FIFO, organization of TDMA) were
introduced.
The future moves toward an increasing interaction between operating systems and NoC, with
mutual QoS-NoC adaptation of multi-applications.
As a result, many types of NoCs have emerged. Bjerregaard and All describe the most
representative NoCs [7].
A NoC is composed by IP cores and routers connected among themselves by communicating
channels [8]. Furthermore, packets are composed by header, payload, and trailer. Packets are
divided into small pieces called Flits [13, 14]. A flit (Flow control unit) corresponds to the
smallest unit of flux control on a link. A phit (Physical unit) corresponds to the quantity of bits
that can be transported in one time on the link. The control can be achieved with a granularity
of one or several phits.
Nowadays, applications need more performances in direct link with the architecture of the
NoC.
This paper presents an overview of this communication centric design paradigm and outlines
the scientific efforts made into NoC research area.
Many tentatives to define and modelize QoS metrics were proposed. Bjerregaard and All, were
defined QoS as service quantification to the demanding core offered by NoC [7].
Helali and All addressed the problem of metrics for end-to-end QoS management on real time
applications by presenting a virtual communication support [15]. Their research was focused on
the study of QoS through the switch buffering requirements [16]. In [17] they were interested
on NoC switch scheduling and its impact on QoS metrics. Recently Nasri proposed a new
approach of QoS metric modelling based on the QoS parameters estimation and applications
priority [18, 19].
In this work, we address the QoS metric problem for NoC based system. We propose a new
approach of QoS metrics modelling and analysis based on dynamic routing for multiapplications environment with multi parameters.
The next section explains the target NoC architecture. Routing techniques are presented in the
section 3, while section 4 focuses on QoS metric modelling requirements. In section 5, we
present the experimentation results and analysis. Finally, this paper is ended by conclusions and
future works.
2. NoC topology
The topology designates a graph of links between different cores of the NoC [20, 21, 22, 23].
Our choice is built on 4x4 mesh topology as shown in Figure 3.
44
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
CBR
TCP
VBR
IP
IP
00
IP
IP
IP
01
IP
02
IP
IP
11
10
IP
20
13
12
IP
IP
03
Sink
IP
23
22
21
IP
IP
IP
IP
33
IP Core
32
31
Network Interface
Router
Link
Figure 3: 4x4 Mesh NoC structure.
Each router has five bi-directional ports: East, West, North, South, and Local. The local port
used to connect its IP core. The other ports are connected to the neighbor routers. Each router
has two (L2), three (L3) or four (L4) bidirectional links with neighbors depending on the
position of each one in the graph (Figure 3). In this case study we have considered three
different sinks connected to router 33 (L2), router 32 (L3) and router 22 (L4).
3. Dynamic Routing Techniques
The routing algorithms define the path taken by a packet between source and destination [24].
According to where routing decisions are taken, it is possible to classify the routing in source
and distributed routing. In source routing, the whole path is decided at the source router, while
in distributed routing each router receives a packet and decides about the direction to send it to.
According to how a path is defined to transmit packets, routing can be also classified as
deterministic or adaptive. In the case of adaptive routing, the path is decided with the
progression of the communication [25]. In dynamic routing, the path is a function of the
network traffic, which we have used in our simulation [26].
For evaluation of our strategy performance, destinations are linked with three types of routers.
We select routers having two (L2), three (L3) or four links (L4) with the same destination.
Trying to meet an ideal network behavior, we define randomly horizontal and vertical failed
paths scenarios on the entire NoC, using random broking link duration time. This forces the
system to search a new path between sources and destination. Three applications: TCP, VBR,
CBR are concurrently active in the same condition and the same time. When horizontal and/or
vertical links are tired down, packets go dynamically through other routes taking the shortest
path to the destination.
45
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
4. QoS METRIC MODELLING REQUIRMENTS
4.1. QoS Definition
Quality of Service (QoS) refers to levels of guarantees given for data transfers. It is a defined
measure of performance in a data communications system. For example, to ensure a delivered
application such us real-time multimedia without losses information, a traffic contract is
negotiated between the network application consumer and provider. This contract guarantees a
minimum of bandwidth along with the maximum delay that can be supported.
Since there is no common or formal QoS metrics definition, we propose a new QoS metric
approach based on the prioritization factors and parameters. Each application needs different
level of performance. Typically QoS parameters include (throughput, end to end delay, jitter,
rate of packet loss…). QoS parameters concern also the priority, reliability, speed and amount
of traffic sending over a network .
4.2. End to End Delay (EED) and Throughput (Thp)
EED concerns the time for a packet to reach its destination starting from its source. It includes
the time elapsed in each node (source- routers) and on links through the communication path
until the packet reaches its destination. The delay is in general unpredictable depending on the
state of the network. While throughput refers to how much data can be transferred from source
to destination in a given amount of time.
4.3. QoS modelling
In a multi-applications environment (app1, app2,..., appm), we define for each application appi a
set of parameters (pi1, pi2, pi3,…, pin).
QoS performance parameters should be normalized as pij, with: pijmax = Max{ pij } and pijmin =
Min{ pij }, [27].
Then:
aFor increasing parameters when application value increases:
̂ |
p – p
|
k p – p
p – p
|
k p – p
c- k ≥ 1: represents the network efficiency coefficient (in our case we chose k= 1.03 for
example).
b-
For decreasing parameters when application value increases :
̂ |
If we suppose that we have m applications, QoS can be expressed by the following model:
1 11 ̂ 11 12 ̂ 21 1 ̂ 1
2 21 ̂ 12 22 ̂ 22 2 ̂ 2
..................................................................
Then:
46
1 ̂ 1
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
Hence:
0
0 1 1 2 2
1 0 0
̂ 11 ̂ 12 ̂ 1
11 12 1
'
0 2 0
0
̂ 21 ̂ 22 … ̂ 2
21 22 … 2
#
#
#& (1)
!
…
"
!
!
0 "
!
!
…
"
!
̂ 1 ̂ 2 ̂
0
0
1 2
%
Where:
QoS0 represents the minimum basic required QoS (in our case, we chose QoS0= 10% of the
value of the ideal QoS), αij and βi are respectively prioritization factors of parameters and
applications, arbitrarily fixed referring to the following equations (for one application appi):
∑+,-.)α/ 1 and
∑4
,-.)β/ 1
(2)
5. EXPERIMENTATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
We used the Ns-2 simulator. It is becoming one of the most popular platforms for performance
analysis in the network research community.
In our simulation, we consider different types of router interconnections depending on the
position of the router on the NoC. The destination is connected to routers: 22, 32 or 33, which
have two (L2), three (L3) or four ports (L4), (Figure 3).
Three applications CBR, VBR and TCP are linked respectively to router 00, 01 and 02. The
communication of these applications starts simultaneously in the same time using a dynamic
routing. We analyze some QoS metrics such as EED and Thp in the NoC nodes.
5.1. End to End Delay:
Figure 4: EED average of TCP
according to packet size
Figure 5: EED average of CBR
according to packet size.
47
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
Figure 6: EED average of VBR
according to packet size.
Figure 7: EED average of three Applications
according to packet size with router (L4).
Figures 4, 5, 6 and 7 give the relationship between EED average and available packet size.
These Figures show that, contrary to CBR, VBR is the application that gives better results.
These applications are increasing with EED. Furthermore, the destination linked with a router
(L4) presents better result; they also show that application variations are similar in L2, L3 and
L4 simulations.
5.2. Throughput (Thp)
Figure 8: Thp Average of CBR
according to packet size.
Figure 10: Thp average of TCP
applications according to packet size.
Figure 9: Thp average of VBR
according to packet size.
Figure 11: Thp average of three
According to packet size with router (L4).
Figures 8, 9, 10 and 11 give the relationship between throughput average and available packet
size for CBR, VBR and TCP applications. VBR gives the better throughput average variation
than the two other applications. TCP gives worse results. Moreover, CBR is not affected by the
48
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
variation of the node type and all applications (TCP, VBR, CBR) are less sensitive to the router
position in the NoC.
5.3. QoS measurements and analysis
Referring to the proposed model (1), we choose the parameters αij, applications βi prioritization
factors and the minimum acceptable value QoS0, as shown in Figures 12, 13 and 14.
In this model, we consider two QoS performance parameters, EED as p1 and Thp as p2, for
three concurrent applications CBR (i=1), VBR (i=2) and TCP (i=3) for different available
packet sizes for router type of L4.
Figure 12: %QoS with parameters
Figure
13:%QoS
with
parameters prioritization factors (αi1=αi2=0.5) of three prioritization factors (αi1=0.2; αi2=
0.8) of applications according to packet size.
three applications according to packet size.
Figure 14: %QoS with parameters prioritization factors (αi1=0.8; αi2=0.2)
of three applications according to packet size.
Figures 12, 13 and 14 show the percent of QoS in relation with the packet size, the scheduling
techniques, parameters and applications prioritization factors. It appears that the percent of QoS
increases with the packet size. Application prioritization factors have also an impact on the QoS
values.
Although the QoS is an abstract notion, we have proposed a new approach of quantifiable
representation of the QoS.
49
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
6. CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES
This paper addresses the QoS metric problem for NoC based system. It proposes a new
approach of QoS metrics modelling for network on chip in a multiple applications and multiple
parameters environment.
We have focused our study on two fundamental measures of network performances and QoS
metrics, EED and Thp in NoC nodes. Two QoS parameters that determine a network
connection speed subject of multiple applications in a dynamic routing environment.
Since QoS is qualitative, subjective and not measurable, we have proposed a new approach of
its quantifiable representation. In fact, we have shown that metrics of QoS during NoC
communication processes are affected by the packet size and its management approach and
increased with parameters and applications prioritization factors. This helps to make up the
efficiency of the QoS metric evaluation.
QoS metrics measurements based on the router buffer optimization size and load balancing on
the NoC with multiple concurrent applications will constitute the future work.
REFERENCES
[1]International Sematech., (2006) “International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors”,
http://public.itrs.net.
[2]International Sematech., (2003) “International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors”,
http://public.itrs.net, interconnect.
[3]De Micheli G., Seiculescu C., Murali S., Benini L., Angiolini F., Pullini A., (2010) “Networks on
chips: From research to products”, in Proc. DAC, pp: 300–305.
[4]Benini L., De Micheli G., (2002) “ Networks on chips: a new SoC paradigm”, IEEE Computer, V.
35(1), pp: 70-78.
[5]Al Faruque M. A., Ebi T., Henkel J., ( 2010) “AdNoC: Runtime Adaptive Network-on-Chip
Architecture”, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, , Volume: PP , Issue:
99, pp: 1-1.
[6]Yiping D., Zhen L., Watanabe T., ( 2010) “An efficient hardware routing algorithms for NoC”, IEEE,
TENCON 2010, pp: 1525 – 1530.
[7]Bjerregaard T., Mahadevan S., ( 2006) “A survey of research and Practice of Network on chip”, ACM
Computing survey, Vol: 38, Article 1.
[8]Rijpkema E., Goossens K., Radulescu A., (2003) “ Trade offs in the design of a router with both
guaranteed and best-effort services for networks on chip”, Design, Automation and Test in Europe
(DATE'03), pp: 350-355.
[9]Rijpkema E., Goossens K., Wielage P., (2001) “ A router architecture for networks on silicon”, The
2nd Workshop on Embedded Systems (PROGRESS'2001), pp: 181-188.
[10]Bolotin, E., Cidon, I., Ginosar, R., Kolodny, A., ( 2004) “QnoC: QoS architecture and design
processfor network on chip”, Journal of Systems Architecture 50(2-3), Special issue on Networks on
Chip, pp:105-128.
[11]Goossens, K., Dielissen, J., Gangwal, O. P., Gonzalez Pestana, S., Radulescu, A., Rijpkema, (2005)
“A design flow for application-specific networks on chip with guaranteed performance to accelerate SoC
design and verification”, in DATE, pp:1182-1187.
[12]Samuel Evain, (2006) “µSpider Environnement de Conception de Réseau sur Puce”, thesis, No.
D06-16, Institut Nationale des Sciences Appliquées de RENNES ( INSA).
[13]Kim J., Park D., Nicopoulos Ch., Vijaykrishnan N., Das R. Chita., (2005) “Design and analysis of a
NoC architecture from performance, reliability and energy perspective”, ACM symposium on
50
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
Architecture for networking and communications systems, Princeton, NJ, USA, ISBN:1-59593-082-5,
pp:173–182.
[14]Murali S., Coenen M., Radulescu A., Goossens K., De Micheli G., (2006) “A methodology for
mapping multiple use-cases onto networks on chips”, Conference on Design, automation and test in
Europe, Munich, Germany, ISBN:3-9810801-0-6, pp: 118–123.
[15]A.Helali, A.Soudani, S.Nasri, T.Divaux, (2005) “An approach for end-to-end QoS and network
resources management”, Computer Standards & Interfaces Journal vol 28, pp 93-108.
[16]A.Helali I, A.Soudani, S.Nasri, (2006) “Study of Network on chip resources allocation for
QoS Management”, Journal of Computer Science vol 2 issue 10, pp 770-774.
[17]Helali A. and Nasri S., (2009) “Network on Chip Switch scheduling Approach for QoS and
Hardware Ressources Adaptation”, Int'l J. of Computer Sciences and Engineering Systems
(IJCSES), Vol.3, No.1, pp: 29-35.
[18]Nasri S., (2011) “Network on Chip: a New Approach of QoS Metric Modelling Based on Calculus
Theory”, Int'l J. of Communications, Network and System Sciences, Vol.3, No.5 ,pp:53-60.
[19]Nasri S., (2011) “New Approach of QoS Metric Modelling on Network on Chip”, Int'l J. of
Communications, Network and System Sciences, Vol.4, No.5 ,pp: 351-355.
[20]Jantsch, H. Tenhunen (Eds.), (2003) “Networks on Chip”, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham,
MA, USA, ISBN: 978-1-4020-7392-2.
[21]Benini L., De Micheli (Eds.) G., (2006) “Networks on Chips: Technology and Tools”, Morgan
Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA, USA, ISBN: 0123705215.
[22]Dally W.J., Towles B., (2001) “ Route packets not wires: on-chip interconnection networks”, in:
Proceedings of Design Automation Conference (DAC’01), ACM, IEEE Press, New York, pp: 648–689.
[23]Winter M., Prusseit S., Gerhard P.F., (2010) “Hierarchical routing architectures in clustered 2D-mesh
Networks-on-Chip”, IEEE, SoC Design Conference (ISOCC), pp : 388 – 391.
[24]Yunus S.A.M.J., Marsono M.N., Ibrahim I., (2011) “Modelling router hotspots on Network-onChip”, IEEE 13th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), pp: 896
– 900.
[25]Dally W. J. et Aoki H., (1993) “Deadlock-Free Adaptive Routing in Multicomputer Networks Using
Virtual Channels ”, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst., vol. 4, No 4, pp: 466–475.
[26]Baglietto M., Battistelli G., Bolla R., Bruschi R., Davoli F., Zoppoli R., (2005) “ A Neural Network
Solution to QoS-IP Team-Optimal Dynamic Routing”, articolo invitato, Proc. Joint 44th IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference, Seville, Spain, pp. 7452-7459.
[27]Yang L., Huacan H., (2007) “ Grid Service Selection Using QoS Model”, Third International
Conference on Semantics, Knowledge and Grid (SKG 2007), pp: 576-577.
Authors
Eng. Abdelkader SAADAOUI
Received his engineering degree in Electrical Engineering from ‘ENIT:
Ecole Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Tunis’ and his Aggregation in Electrical
Engineering from the ‘ENSET: Ecole Normale Supérieure de
l'Enseignement Technique de Tunis’, Tunisia in 1993 and 1995,
respectively. He is simultaneously an assistant professor at the ‘BCT:
Buraidah College of Technology’, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and ‘ISET:
Institut Supérieur des études Technologiques de Sfax - Tunisia’. Currently
he is preparing his PhD at the ‘ENIS: Ecole Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Sfax Tunisia’. His research interests include Quality of Service integration in
Network on Chip (NoC). His recent work has been in QoS Metrics on multi51
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.2, March 2012
application environment.
Pr. Salem Nasri
Received his PhD in Automatic Control and Computer Engineering from
‘INSA: Institut National des Sciences Appliquées’ Toulouse, France, in June
1985. He obtained the diploma of “HDR: Habilitation à Diriger les
Recherches” in Computer Engineering, in May 2001 from the ‘ENIS: Ecole
Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Sfax’, Tunisia. He is simultaneously Professor at
‘ENIM: Ecole Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Monastir’, Tunisia, and at the
Computer College, Qassim University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. His research
interests are: Computer Networks, Network on chip, High Speed Protocols,
Wireless Communication Systems, Multimedia Applications and Quality of
Service Modelling.
52
View publication stats