NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1/NN_1993_1.iso/spool/comp/arch/12131

Text File | 1993-01-07 | 3.7 KB | 96 lines

Newsgroups: comp.arch
Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!csrd.uiuc.edu!sp90.csrd.uiuc.edu!grout
From: [e-mail] (John R. Grout)
Subject: Re: How does an R4000-style cache work?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: Write-back Cache
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 20:17:33 GMT
Lines: 82

[e-mail] (Andrew Wolfe) writes:

>I am unclear on the timing involved when write misses occur on a write-back
>cache (like in the R4000).  Perhaps someone can clarify.

>When a write is attempted - a virtual index is used to select a cache line
>and a virtual offset selects bytes within that line.  This happens during
>the DF stage in the R4000.  The memory can then be accessed during the DS
>stage.  I assume that the tag is read at this time.  If a write is allowed
>to occur at this time - it may destroy data in the cache.

>The tag is checked at the next stage (TC).  If the tags match - all is OK -
>but if the tags do not match, then I have written over the previous data in
>the cache.  If I delay stores until after the tag check - then the memory is
>busy with another instruction in the pipeline.


>I can conceive of several possible solutions:

>1)  Always save a copy of the overwritten line (for writeback).

>2)  Delay the write - then simultaneously read and write the cache.
>    (write from instruction in TC, read from instruction in MS)

>3)  Delay the write - then stall the pipeline on a hit or miss if the next
>    instruction is a load.

>The first two require a heavy-duty dual-ported cache.  The third requires
>stalls that I cannot find documented.

>What method is really used to solve this problem in the R4000 and similar
>write-back caches?

From "The MIPS R4000 Processor", by Mirapuri, Woodacre and Vasseghi, IEEE
Micro, IEEE Micro (April 1992), pp. 10-22.

Figure 1 (p. 11) is the "R4000 internal block diagram" which illustrates a
    "write buffer" and a "store buffer/aligner".

From the "CPU pipeline" paragraph (pp. 11-12):

    "In the data first (DF) and data second (DS) stages, the R4000
    accesses the data cache, with a new access starting every cycle.
    The MMU translates the data virtual address into a physical address
    during these stages.  In the tag check (TC) stage, the R4000 compares
    the data tags from the cache tag array with the translated address to
    determine if the data cache access was a hit.  For stores, if the tag
    check passes in TC, the data travel to the store buffer and enter the
    data cache the next time cache bandwidth is available."

From the "Stalls, slips and exceptions" paragraph (pp. 14-17):

    "The different stall types include:

    Data cache miss, detected by the data tag check

    Data first stage stalls, which can occur for
    three mutually exclusive groups of
    instructions...

        3) The pipeline stalls to let the store buffer entries retire
           to memory because control logic has detected a load to the
           same memory location."

So, the indicated solution is:

4)   Put the data in a write buffer until tag check.

     On a cache miss, stall the pipeline and write the data to cache as part
      of miss processing.

     On a cache hit, put the data to the store buffer and unload it when:

    a) The cache bandwidth is available: no pipeline effects.
    b) A load which wants to use the results of the store is
        detected: stall the pipeline and empty the store buffer.
    c) The store buffer is full: not clear (is this handled like case "b"?)

--
John R. Grout                        [e-mail]
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Center for Supercomputing Research and Development