EE384y: Packet Switch Architectures

Matchings, implementation and heuristics

H

S

Te

i

w

lec

g

i

.

om

h

tc

Ce

P

h

nte

e

i

W

r

r

n

ork

fo

sho

g

r

a

p:

Se

m

n

pt 4

a

d

1 ,

n

R

997

c

o

e

u

t

in

g

Nick McKeown

Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Stanford University

nickm@stanford.edu

www.stanford.edu/~nickm

Spring 2006

1

Outline

 Finding a maximum match.

 Maximum network flow problems

_• Definitions and example _• Augmenting paths



Maximum size/weight matchings as examples of maximum network flows

_• Maximum size matching _• Complexity of maximum size matchings and maximum weight matchings

 What algorithms are used in practice?

 Maximal Matches  Wavefront Arbiter (WFA)  Parallel Iterative Matching (PIM)  iSLIP

Spring 2006

2

Network Flows

a

c

10

10

10

1

1

10

10

b

d

1

Source

s

Sink

t

_•

•

•

Let G = [V,E] be a directed graph with capacity cap(v,w) on edge [v,w].

A flow is an (integer) function, f, that is chosen

for each edge so that

f (v,w)

cap(v,w).

We wish to maximize the flow allocation.

Spring 2006

3

A maximum network flow example

By inspection

a

c

10

Source

Sink

10

10

s

1

t

1

10

10

b

d

1

Step 1:

a

c

10, 10

Source

Sink

10, 10

s

1

10, 10

t

1

10

10

b

d

1

Flow is of size 10

Spring 2006

4

A maximum network flow example

Step 2:

a

c

10, 10

10, 10

1

10, 10

1

10, 1

b

d

10, 1

1, 1

Flow is of size 10+1 = 11

Source

s

Sink

t

• Not

Maximum flow:

a

c

10, 9

10, 10

1,1

10, 10

1,1

10, 2

b

d

10, 2

1, 1

Source

s

Sink

t

obvious

Flow is of size 10+2 = 12

Spring 2006

5

Ford-Fulkerson method of augmenting paths

• 1. Set f(v,w) = -f(w,v) on all edges.

• 2. Define a Residual Graph, R, in which res(v,w) = cap(v,w) – f(v,w)

• 3. Find paths from s to t for which there is positive residue.

• 4. Increase the flow along the paths to augment them by the minimum residue along the path.

• 5. Keep augmenting paths until there are no more to augment.

Spring 2006

6

Example of Residual Graph

a

c

10, 10

10, 10

1

10, 10

1

10

10

b

d

1

Flow is of size 10

res(v,w) = cap(v,w) – f(v,w)

c

10

10

1

a

10

1

10

10

b

d

1

s

t

Residual Graph, R

s

t

Augmenting path

Spring 2006

7

Example of Residual Graph

Step 2:

a

c

10, 10

10, 10

s

1

10, 10

t

1

10, 1

b

d

10, 1

1, 1

Flow is of size 10+1 = 11

Residual Graph

a

c

10

10

10

1

s

t

1

1

1

b

d

1

9

9

Spring 2006

8

Example of Residual Graph

Step 3:

a

c

10, 9

10, 10

s

1, 1

10, 10

t

1, 1

10, 2

b

d

10, 2

1, 1

Flow is of size 10+2 = 12

1

Residual Graph

a

c

9

10

10

1

s

1

2

2

b

d

1

8

8

t

Spring 2006

9

Complexity of network flow problems

 In general, it is possible to find a solution by considering at most |V|.|E| paths, by

picking shortest augmenting path first.

 There are many variations, such as picking

most augmenting path first.

Spring 2006

10

Outline

 Finding a maximum match.

 Maximum network flow problems



_• Definitions and example _• Augmenting paths

Maximum size/weight matchings as examples of maximum network flows

_• Maximum size matching _• Complexity of maximum size matchings and maximum weight matchings

 What algorithms are used in practice?

 Maximal Matches  Wavefront Arbiter (WFA)  Parallel Iterative Matching (PIM)  iSLIP

Spring 2006

11

Finding a maximum size match

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

 How do we find the maximum size (weight) match?

Spring 2006

12

Network flows and bipartite matching

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

Sink

t

Source

s

Finding a maximum size bipartite matching is equivalent to solving a network flow problem with capacities and flows of size 1.

Spring 2006

13

Network flows and bipartite matching

Ford-Fulkerson method

Residual Graph for first three paths:

s

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

t

Spring 2006

14

Network flows and bipartite matching

Residual Graph for next two paths:

s

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

t

Spring 2006

15

Network flows and bipartite matching

Residual Graph for augmenting path:

s

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

t

Spring 2006

16

Network flows and bipartite matching

Residual Graph for last augmenting path:

s

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

t

Note that the path augments the match: no input and output is removed from the match during the augmenting step.

Spring 2006

17

Network flows and bipartite matching

Maximum flow graph:

s

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

t

Spring 2006

18

Network flows and bipartite matching

Maximum Size Matching:

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

Spring 2006

19

Complexity of Maximum Matchings

 Maximum Size Matchings:

 Algorithm by Dinic O(N ^5/2 )

 Maximum Weight Matchings

 Algorithm by Kuhn O(N ³ )

 In general:

 Hard to implement in hardware  Slooooow.

Spring 2006

20

Outline

 Finding a maximum match.

 Maximum network flow problems

_• Definitions and example _• Augmenting paths



Maximum size/weight matchings as examples of maximum network flows

_• Maximum size matching _• Complexity of maximum size matchings and maximum weight matchings

 What algorithms are used in practice?

 Maximal Matches  Wavefront Arbiter (WFA)  Parallel Iterative Matching (PIM)  iSLIP

Spring 2006

21

Maximal Matching

 A maximal matching is one in which each edge is added one at a time, and is not later removed from the matching.

 i.e. no augmenting paths allowed (they remove edges added earlier).

 No input and output are left unnecessarily idle.

Spring 2006

22

Example of Maximal Size Matching

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

Maximal Size Matching

A

1

B

2

C

3

D

4

E

5

F

6

Maximum Size Matching

Spring 2006

23

Maximal Matchings

 In general, maximal matching is simpler to implement, and has a faster running time.

 A maximal size matching is at least half the size of a maximum size matching.

 A maximal weight matching is defined in the obvious way.

 A maximal weight matching is at least half the weight of a maximum weight matching.

Spring 2006

24

Outline

 Finding a maximum match.

 Maximum network flow problems

_• Definitions and example _• Augmenting paths



Maximum size/weight matchings as examples of maximum network flows

_• Maximum size matching _• Complexity of maximum size matchings and maximum weight matchings

 What algorithms are used in practice?

 Maximal Matches  Wavefront Arbiter (WFA)  Parallel Iterative Matching (PIM)  iSLIP

Spring 2006

25

Wave Front Arbiter

(Tamir)

Requests

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

Match

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

Spring 2006

26

Wave Front Arbiter

Requests

Match

Spring 2006

27

Wave Front Arbiter

Implementation

1,1

1,2

1,3

1,4

Simple combinational

logic blocks

2,1

2,2

2,3

2,4

3,1

3,2

3,3

3,4

4,1

4,2

4,3

4,4

Spring 2006

28

Wave Front Arbiter

Wrapped WFA (WWFA)

N steps instead of

2N-1

Requests

Match

Spring 2006

29

Wavefront Arbiters

Properties

 Feed-forward (i.e. non-iterative) design lends itself to pipelining.  Always finds maximal match.  Usually requires mechanism to prevent Q ₁₁ from getting preferential service.  In principle, can be distributed over multiple chips.

Spring 2006

30

Outline

 Finding a maximum match.

 Maximum network flow problems

_• Definitions and example _• Augmenting paths



Maximum size/weight matchings as examples of maximum network flows

_• Maximum size matching _• Complexity of maximum size matchings and maximum weight matchings

 What algorithms are used in practice?

 Maximal Matches  Wavefront Arbiter (WFA)  Parallel Iterative Matching (PIM)  iSLIP

Spring 2006

31

_{It e ra t io n :}

#1

#2

Parallel Iterative Matching

uar selection

uar selection

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

2: Grant

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

• 1 1

• 2 2

• 3 3

• 4 4

1: Requests

3: Accept/Match

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

Spring 2006

32

PIM Properties

 Guaranteed to find a maximal match in at most N iterations.

 In each phase, each input and output arbiter can make decisions independently.

 In general, will converge to a maximal match in < N iterations.

 How many iterations should we run?

Spring 2006

33

Parallel Iterative Matching

Convergence Time

Number of iterations to converge:

C

=

# of iterations required to resolve connections

N 2

E

[

U

]

-------

i

i

N

=

# of ports

4

=

#

of unresolved connections after iteration i

E[C]

logN

U i

Spring 2006

34

Parallel Iterative Matching

Spring 2006

35

Parallel Iterative Matching

PIM with a

single iteration

Spring 2006

36

Parallel Iterative Matching

PIM with 4

iterations

Spring 2006

37

Outline

 Finding a maximum match.

 Maximum network flow problems

_• Definitions and example _• Augmenting paths



Maximum size/weight matchings as examples of maximum network flows

_• Maximum size matching _• Complexity of maximum size matchings and maximum weight matchings

 What algorithms are used in practice?

 Maximal Matches  Wavefront Arbiter (WFA)  Parallel Iterative Matching (PIM)  iSLIP

Spring 2006

38

iSLIP

1

4

2

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

2

2

2

#1

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

1: Requests

2: Grant

3: Accept/Match

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

#2

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

Spring 2006

39

iSLIP Operation

 Grant phase: Each output selects the requesting input at the pointer, or the next input in round-robin order. It only updates

its pointer if the grant is accepted.

 Accept phase: Each input selects the granting output at the pointer, or the next output in round-robin order.

 Consequence: Under high load, grant pointers tend to move to unique values.

Spring 2006

40

iSLIP

Properties

 Random under low load  TDM under high load  Lowest priority to MRU  1 iteration: fair to outputs



Converges in at most N iterations. (On average, simulations suggest < log ₂ N)

 Implementation: N priority encoders  100% throughput for uniform i.i.d. traffic.

 But…some pathological patterns can lead to low throughput.

Spring 2006

41

iSLIP

Spring 2006

42

iSLIP

Spring 2006

43

iSLIP

Programmable

Priority Encoder

Implementation

N

1

1

log 2 N

Grant

Accept

2

2

N

log

N

2

Grant

Accept

State

Decision

N

N

N

log

N

2

Grant

Accept

Spring 2006

44

Maximal Matches

 Maximal matching algorithms are widely used in industry (PIM, iSLIP, WFA and others).

 PIM and iSLIP are rarely run to completion (i.e. they are sub-maximal).

 A maximal match with a speedup of 2 is stable for non-uniform traffic.

Spring 2006

45