The applicability of integrated layer processing

We review previous work on the applicability and performance of integrated layer processing (ILP). ILP has been shown to clearly improve computer communication performance when integrating simple data manipulation functions, but the situation has been less clear for more complex functions and complete systems. We discuss complications when applying ILP to protocol stacks, the requirements of ILP on the communication subsystem, caching aspects, the importance of the processor registers, and a model for predicting the performance of data manipulation functions. We conclude that the main drawback of ILP is its limited applicability to complex data manipulation functions. The performance to expect from an ILP implementation also depends heavily on the protocol architecture and the host system architecture.

[1]  Larry L. Peterson,et al.  Fbufs: a high-bandwidth cross-domain transfer facility , 1994, SOSP '93.

[2]  David Clark,et al.  Architectural considerations for a new generation of protocols , 1990, SIGCOMM 1990.

[3]  P. Druschel,et al.  Network subsystem design , 1993, IEEE Network.

[4]  Craig Partridge,et al.  A faster UDP , 1993, TNET.

[5]  Mats Björkman,et al.  Towards Predictable ILP Performance - Controlling Communication Buffer Cache Effects , 1996, Aust. Comput. J..

[6]  장훈,et al.  [서평]「Computer Organization and Design, The Hardware/Software Interface」 , 1997 .

[7]  Torsten Braun,et al.  Automated code generation for integrated layer processing , 1996, Protocols for High-Speed Networks.

[8]  Peter Steenkiste.  A systematic approach to host interface design for high-speed networks , 1994, Computer.

[9]  Bengt Ahlgren.  A performance model for integrated layer processing , 1997, HPN.

[10]  J.M. Smith,et al.  Giving applications access to Gb/s networking , 1993, IEEE Network.

[11]  Donald J. Patterson,et al.  Computer organization and design: the hardware-software interface (appendix a , 1993 .

[12]  Larry L. Peterson,et al.  Increasing network throughput by integrating protocol layers , 1993, TNET.

[13]  Sally A. McKee,et al.  Hitting the memory wall: implications of the obvious , 1995, CARN.

[14]  Bengt Ahlgren,et al.  Increasing communication performance with a minimal-copy data path supporting ILP and ALF , 1996, J. High Speed Networks.

[15]  Torsten Braun,et al.  Performance evaluation and cache analysis of an ILP protocol implementation , 1996, TNET.

[16]  David D. Clark,et al.  Architectural considerations for a new generation of protocols , 1990, SIGCOMM '90.

[17]  Mats Björkman,et al.  Integrated layer processing can be hazardous to your performance , 1996, Protocols for High-Speed Networks.

[18]  Randall J. Atkinson,et al.  IP Authentication Header , 1995, RFC.

[19]  Michael Fry,et al.  Some Issues for Dynamic Synthesis of ALF/ILP Systems , 1996, Aust. Comput. J..

[20]  C. Dalton,et al.  Afterburner (network-independent card for protocols) , 1993, IEEE Network.

[21]  B. Ahlgren,et al.  The Performance Of A No-Copy API For Communication , 1995, Third IEEE Workshop on the Architecture and Implementation of High Performance Communication Subsystems.

[22]  Philip R. Zimmermann,et al.  The official PGP user's guide , 1996 .

[23]  Randall J. Atkinson,et al.  IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) , 1995, RFC.

[24]  David P. Anderson,et al.  The performance of message‐passing using restricted virtual memory remapping , 1991, Softw. Pract. Exp..