================ Start Lecture #19
================
4.3.3: TLBs--Translation Lookaside Buffers (and General
Associative Memory)
Note:
Tanenbaum suggests that ``associative memory'' and ``translation
lookaside buffer'' are synonyms. This is wrong. Associative memory
is a general structure and translation lookaside buffer is a special
case.
An
associative memory is a content addressable
memory. That is you access the memory by giving the value
of some field and the hardware searches all the records and returns
the record whose field contains the requested value.
For example
Name | Animal | Mood | Color
======+========+==========+======
Moris | Cat | Finicky | Grey
Fido | Dog | Friendly | Black
Izzy | Iguana | Quiet | Brown
Bud | Frog | Smashed | Green
If the index field is Animal and Iguana is given, the associative
memory returns
Izzy | Iguana | Quiet | Brown
A Translation Lookaside Buffer
or TLB
is an associate memory
where the index field is the page number. The other fields include
the frame number, dirty bit, valid bit, and others.
-
A TLB is small and expensive but at least it is
fast. When the page number is in the TLB, the frame number
is returned very quickly.
-
On a miss, the page number is looked up in the page table. The record
found is placed in the TLB and a victim is discarded. There is no
placement question since all entries are accessed at the same time.
But there is a replacement question.
Homework: 17.
4.3.4: Inverted page tables
Keep a table indexed by frame number with the entry f containing the
number of the page currently loaded in frame f.
- Since modern machine have a smaller physical address space than
virtual address space, the table is smaller
- But on a TLB miss, must search the inverted page table.
- Would be hopelessly slow except that some tricks are employed.
- The book mentions some but not all of the tricks, we are skipping
this topic.
4.4: Page Replacement Algorithms (PRAs)
These are solutions to the replacement question.
Good solutions take advantage of locality.
- Temporal locality: If a word is referenced now,
it is likely to be referenced in the near future.
- This argues for caching referenced words,
i.e. keeping the referenced word near the processor for a while.
- Spatial locality: If a word is referenced now,
nearby words are likely to be referenced in the near future.
- This argues for prefetching words around the currently
referenced word.
- These are lumped together into locality: If any
word in a page is referenced, each word in the page is ``likely'' to
be referenced.
- So it is good to bring in the entire page on a miss and to
keep the page in memory for a while.
- When programs begin there is no history so nothing to base
locality on. At this point the paging system is said to be undergoing
a ``cold start''.
- Programs exhibit ``phase changes'', when the set of pages referenced
changes abruptly (similar to a cold start). At the point of a phase
change, many page faults occur because locality is poor.
Pages belonging to processes that have terminated are of course
perfect choices for victims.
Pages belonging to processes that have been blocked for a long time
are good choices as well.
Random PRA
A lower bound on performance. Any decent scheme should do better.
4.4.1: The optimal page replacement algorithm (opt PRA) (aka
Belady's min PRA)
Replace the page whose next
reference will be furthest in the future.
- Also called Belady's min algorithm.
- Provably optimal. That is, generates the fewest number of page
faults.
- Unimplementable: Requires predicting the future.
- Good upper bound on performance.
4.4.2: The not recently used (NRU) PRA
Divide the frames into four classes and make a random selection from
the lowest nonempty class.
- Not referenced, not modified
- Not referenced, modified
- Referenced, not modified
- Referenced, modified
Assumes that in each PTE there are two extra flags R (sometimes called
U, for used) and M (often called D, for dirty).
Also assumes that a page in a lower priority class is cheaper to evict.
- If not referenced, probably will not referenced again soon and
hence is a good candidate for eviction.
- If not modified, do not have to write it out so the cost of the
eviction is lower.
- When a page is brought in, OS resets R and M (i.e. R=M=0)
- On a read, hardware sets R.
- On a write, hardware sets R and M.
We again have the prisoner problem, we do a good job of making little
ones out of big ones, but not the reverse. Need more resets.
Every k clock ticks, reset all R bits
- Why not reset M?
Answer: Must have M accurate to know if victim needs to be written back
- Could have two M bits one accurate and one reset, but I don't know
of any system (or proposal) that does so.
What if the hardware doesn't set these bits?
- OS can use tricks
- When the bits are reset, make the PTE indicate the page is not
resident (i.e. lie). On the page fault, set the appropriate bit(s).
4.4.3: FIFO PRA
Simple but poor since usage of the page is ignored.
Belady's Anomaly: Can have more frames yet generate
more faults.
Example given later.
4.4.4: Second chance PRA
Similar to the FIFO PRA but when time choosing a victim, if the page
at the head of the queue has been referenced (R bit set), don't evict
it.
Instead reset R and move the page to the rear of the queue (so it
looks new).
The page is being a second chance.
What if all frames have been referenced?
Becomes the same as fifo (but takes longer).
Might want to turn off the R bit more often (say every k clock ticks).
4.4.5: Clock PRA
Same algorithm as 2nd chance, but a better (and I would say obvious)
implementation: Use a circular list.
Do an example.
LIFO PRA
This is terrible! Why?
Ans: All but the last frame are frozen once loaded so you can replace
only one frame. This is especially bad after a phase shift in the
program when it is using all new pages.
4.4.6:Least Recently Used (LRU) PRA
When a page fault occurs, choose as victim that page that has been
unused for the longest time, i.e. that has been least recently used.
LRU is definitely
- Implementable: The past is knowable.
- Good: Simulation studies have shown this.
- Difficult. Essentially need to either:
- Keep a time stamp in each PTE, updated on each reference
and scan all the PTEs when choosing a victim to find the PTE
with the oldest timestamp.
- Keep the PTEs in a linked list in usage order, which means
on each reference moving the PTE to the end of the list
Homework: 29, 23
A hardware cutsie in Tanenbaum
- For n pages, keep an nxn bit matrix.
- On a reference to page i, set row i to all 1s and col i to all 0s
-
At any time the 1 bits in the rows are ordered by inclusion. I.e. one
row's 1s are a subset of another row's 1s, which is a subset of a
third. (Tanenbaum forgets to mention this.)
-
So the row with the fewest 1s is a subset of all the others and is
hence least recently used
- Cute, but still impractical.
4.4.7: Simulating (Approximating) LRU in Software
The Not Frequently Used (NFU) PRA
- Include a counter in each PTE (and have R in each PTE).
- Set counter to zero when page is brought into memory.
- For each PTE, every k clock ticks.
- Add R to counter.
- Clear R.
- Choose as victim the PTE with lowest count.
R | counter |
---|
1 | 10000000 |
|
0 | 01000000 |
|
1 | 10100000 |
|
1 | 11010000 |
|
0 | 01101000 |
|
0 | 00110100 |
|
1 | 10011010 |
|
1 | 11001101 |
|
0 | 01100110 |
|
The Aging PRA
NFU doesn't distinguish between old references and recent ones. The
following modification does distinguish.
- Include a counter in each PTE (and have R in each PTE).
- Set counter to zero when page is brought into memory.
- For each PTE, every k clock ticks.
- Shift counter right one bit.
- Insert R as new high order bit (HOB).
- Clear R.
- Choose as victim the PTE with lowest count.
Homework: 25, 34