w15 slices around 2/3 ~ 3/4 done?

tex/misc/w12_slices.tex

@@ -265,7 +265,8 @@
             Multi-home Protocol: instead of having one home at a time, have
             multiple homes (e.g., when writer commits) to prevent network bottleneck.
             \begin{itemize}
-                \item Extra metadata can limit scalability (e.g., granularity of directories)
+                \item Home nodes can be dynamically assigned 
+                \item Extra metadata can limit scalability.
             \end{itemize}
         }
         \item {

tex/misc/w15_slides.tex

@@ -204,24 +204,174 @@
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-    \frametitle{Consistency Model}
+    \frametitle{Protocol Excerpt: Write-Invalidate}
-
+    \begin{figure}
-
+        \centering
-
+        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{
+            w12_slides_resources/Fig-RwlockProtocol 2023-12-06 19_05_06.pdf
+        }
+    \end{figure}
+    The \textit{T}-state indicates a transitionary state for some shared page.
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-    \frametitle{Coherence Protocol}
+    \frametitle{Consistency Model: TSO}
-
+    \begin{itemize}
-
+        \item {
-
+            Total Store Ordering allows Reads to bypass Stores.
+        }
+        \item {
+            Assuming correct use of node-local synchronization on all nodes,
+            applying TSO in a home-based DSM allows for:
+            \begin{itemize}
+                \item {
+                    When another node tries to read T-page from access-control
+                    node: W$\rightarrow$R violation.
+                }
+                \item {
+                    When another node tries to read S-page from data-provider
+                    nodes: W$\rightarrow$R violation (if e.g., the invalidation
+                    message from access-control node was received afterwards).
+                }
+                \item {
+                    Data-provider and access-control nodes work on one request
+                    at a time: no R$\rightarrow$W violation.
+                }
+                \item {
+                    Write-accesses serialized at access-control node: no
+                    W$\rightarrow$W violation.
+                }
+            \end{itemize}
+        }
+    \end{itemize}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-    \frametitle{Stateful Nodes}
+    \frametitle{Consistency Model: Strengthen to Sequential}
+    \begin{itemize}
+        \item {
+            By corollary, can reverse the previous page's statements to
+            strengthen to sequential consistency:
+            \begin{itemize}
+                \item {
+                    Disallow T-pages from being serviced until new page content
+                    is installed: lengthens critical section.
+                }
+                \item {
+                    Abolish data-provider nodes: access-control nodes become
+                    bottleneck.
+                }
+            \end{itemize}
+        }
+    \end{itemize}
+\end{frame}
 
+\begin{frame}
+    \frametitle{Coherence Protocol: Possible Features}
+    \begin{itemize}
+        \item {
+            Multi-data-provider Protocol: Instead of having one data-provider,
+            have multiple data-provider nodes that are automatically write-back
+            to prevent network bottleneck.
+            \begin{itemize}
+                \item Data provider nodes may be dynamically assigned.
+                \item Extra metadata can limit scalability.
+            \end{itemize}
+        }
+        \item {
+            Auto-share: likewise, write-back pages to non-data-provider nodes to
+            take advantage of 1-sided communications.
+        }
+        \item {
+            Request aggregation: aggregate RDMA transfers for optimal transfer
+            performance.
+            \begin{itemize}
+                \item Need to be coherent with program sequence!
+                \item Enables write-request merging.
+            \end{itemize}
+        }
+    \end{itemize}
+\end{frame}
 
+\begin{frame}
+    \frametitle{Stateful Nodes \& Transitions (Provisional)}
+    \begin{itemize}
+        \item {
+            Nodes (e.g., within the cluster) become tightly bound with the
+            properties of each shared page(s).
+        }
+    \end{itemize}
+    \begin{figure}
+        \centering
+        \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{
+            w15_resources/截屏 2024-01-30 19.15.45 2024-01-30 19_16_19.png
+        }
+    \end{figure}
+\end{frame}
 
+\begin{frame}
+    \frametitle{Stateful Nodes \& Transitions (Provisional) (Cont.)}
+    \begin{itemize}
+        \item {
+            MN (Manager Nodes): Provide access-control and (fallback)
+            data-provision.
+        }
+        \item {
+            HN (Home Nodes): Provide data-provision. Can be write-back or
+            write-invalidate.
+        }
+        \item {
+            SN (Sharer Nodes): Share data within a reader-only ``epoch''. Can be
+            write-back or write-invalidate.
+        }
+        \item {
+            NSN (Non-sharer Nodes): Nodes in network without sharing the
+            particular page(s).
+        }
+        \item {
+            CN (Commit Node): Node that acquired the single-writer access to the
+            shared page.
+        }
+        \item {
+            Message variants are not finalized:
+            \begin{itemize}
+                \item {
+                    Goal: Composable message chains that allow for
+                    ``piggy-backing'' of multiple procedures.
+                }
+            \end{itemize}
+        }
+    \end{itemize}
+\end{frame}
+
+\begin{frame}
+    \frametitle{Stateful Nodes: Transition Paths}
+    \begin{itemize}
+        \item {
+            Filled line transitions indicate local requests remote to perform
+            state transition.
+        }
+        \item {
+            Dashed line transitions indicate local implicitly transitions prior
+            to sending request to remote.
+        }
+        \item {
+            \textit{Non-committal} path concerns about read-only and
+            copy-on-write sharing. Sharers cannot make global modification to
+            cached local data.
+        }
+        \item {
+            \textit{Invalidation} path is duo with commit operations (due to
+            write-invalidation).
+        }
+        \item {
+            \textit{Committal} path concerns about global write sharing. Only
+            one writer is allowed to write and commit at one time.
+        }
+        \item {
+            Problem: How exactly to integrate RDMA remote read/write into this?
+        }
+    \end{itemize}
 \end{frame}
 
 % Part 3: Progress
@@ -230,9 +380,25 @@
 
 \begin{frame}
     \frametitle{Progress}
-
+    \begin{itemize}
-
+        \item {
-
+            Goal: in-kernel implementation of software cache-coherency via
+            non-coherent RDMA hardware.
+        }
+        \item {
+            Optimistic Goal: in-kernel implementation of memory model in DSM.
+        }
+        \item {
+            Progress: studied and isolated mechanism for data cache
+            invalidation/flushing in ARM64, which allows the DSM to run in
+            heterogeneous ISA clusters.
+        }
+        \item {
+            Integration with kernel \& main DSM kernel module remains at hand:
+            is it absolutely necessary to export new symbols for such an
+            important operation?
+        }
+    \end{itemize}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
@@ -266,5 +432,9 @@
 
 \end{frame}
 
+% Part 4: Future Work
+% =============================================================================
+
 % References
+
 \end{document}