Efficient Error Detection and Correction for Processing-in-Memory Architectures

Belangrijkste concepten

The core message of this article is to propose an efficient error detection and correction pipeline for processing-in-memory (PiM) architectures, which considers both memory and computation-induced errors.

Samenvatting

The article discusses the design of error detection and correction mechanisms for processing-in-memory (PiM) architectures, which directly perform logic operations within the memory system to improve performance and energy efficiency. PiM architectures inherit the reliability vulnerabilities of the underlying memory substrates, and are also subject to errors due to the computation in place.
The authors first explore the design space for error correcting codes (ECCs) in the PiM context, considering both memory and computation-induced errors. They find that traditional ECCs designed for memory are not sufficient, as they do not account for errors that occur during computation.
The authors then propose an efficient error detection and correction pipeline for PiM architectures. The error detection pipeline relies on parity preservation, where the parity of the data is maintained as computation progresses. The error correction pipeline builds upon this, using Hamming codes to detect and correct errors.
The proposed pipelines are evaluated across three representative PiM technologies - ReRAM, STT-MRAM, and SOT/SHE-MRAM. The results show that the Hamming code-based error correction pipeline provides a better latency vs. area trade-off compared to traditional Triple Modular Redundancy (TMR), especially for larger-scale computations. The energy overhead of the ECC is significant, but can be offset by the benefits in the area vs. latency trade-off, depending on the application requirements and error characteristics.

Statistieken

The article provides the following key data points:

Resistance ratio (RP/ON, RAP/OFF) for the three PiM technologies: STT-MRAM (3.15 KΩ, 7.34 KΩ), SOT/SHE-MRAM (253.97 KΩ, 507.94 KΩ), ReRAM (1 KΩ, 300 KΩ)
Critical current (IC) for switching in STT-MRAM (50 μA) and SOT/SHE-MRAM (3 μA)
Switching time (tswitch) for the three technologies: STT-MRAM (1 ns), SOT/SHE-MRAM (1 ns), ReRAM (1.3 ns)
Energy consumption for NOR and THR gates in the three technologies: STT-MRAM (21 fJ, 11.2 fJ), SOT/SHE-MRAM (1.72 fJ, 1.32 fJ), ReRAM (310.96 fJ, 210.13 fJ)

Citaten

None.

Belangrijkste Inzichten Gedestilleerd Uit

On Error Correction for Nonvolatile Processing-In-Memory

by Hüsr... om arxiv.org 04-30-2024

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2207.13261.pdf

Diepere vragen

How can the proposed error detection and correction pipeline be extended to handle permanent (hard) errors in the PiM architecture, in addition to the transient (soft) errors considered in this work

To extend the proposed error detection and correction pipeline to handle permanent (hard) errors in the PiM architecture, we need to incorporate mechanisms for fault tolerance beyond the transient (soft) errors addressed in the current work. One approach could involve implementing redundant computation units or memory elements that can take over in case of a permanent error. By duplicating critical components and comparing their outputs, we can detect and correct discrepancies caused by hard errors. This redundancy can be at the gate level, where multiple gates perform the same operation simultaneously, or at the memory cell level, where data is stored redundantly in multiple cells. Additionally, error correction codes specifically designed for hard errors, such as Bose-Chaudhuri-Hocquenghem (BCH) codes, can be integrated into the pipeline to provide robust protection against permanent errors.

What are the potential trade-offs between the energy efficiency, area overhead, and latency of the Hamming code-based error correction pipeline compared to alternative ECC schemes, such as Reed-Muller or Berger codes, which may offer better homomorphic properties

The trade-offs between energy efficiency, area overhead, and latency of the Hamming code-based error correction pipeline compared to alternative ECC schemes like Reed-Muller or Berger codes depend on several factors. Hamming codes offer a good balance between error detection and correction capabilities, with a relatively low overhead in terms of area and latency. However, they may not provide the same level of error correction capability as more complex codes like Reed-Muller or Berger codes, which have higher homomorphic properties and can correct multiple errors within a codeword.
Reed-Muller codes, for example, are known for their ability to correct multiple errors and are more suitable for applications where a higher level of fault tolerance is required. However, they come with a higher computational complexity and may result in increased area and latency overhead. Berger codes, on the other hand, offer efficient error correction properties but may require more resources for implementation.
In comparison, Hamming codes are simpler to implement, require fewer resources, and provide adequate error detection and correction capabilities for many applications. The choice of ECC scheme should be based on the specific requirements of the PiM architecture, considering factors such as the expected error rates, the criticality of the data being processed, and the available resources for implementing the error correction pipeline.

Given the significant energy overhead of the ECC updates, how can the PiM architecture and application-level optimizations be leveraged to further improve the energy efficiency of the overall system

To improve the energy efficiency of the overall system in light of the significant energy overhead of ECC updates, several strategies can be employed at the PiM architecture and application levels:

Architectural Optimization: Implementing energy-efficient PiM architectures that minimize unnecessary data movements and optimize the use of computational resources can help reduce overall energy consumption. Techniques such as data locality optimization, task scheduling, and power gating can be utilized to improve energy efficiency.

Dynamic Voltage and Frequency Scaling (DVFS): Adapting the voltage and frequency of the PiM components based on workload requirements can help reduce energy consumption during periods of low activity. DVFS techniques can dynamically adjust the operating parameters to match the computational demands, optimizing energy efficiency.

Data Compression: Utilizing data compression techniques to reduce the amount of data transferred between memory and processing units can lower energy consumption. By compressing data before processing and decompressing it after computation, the system can save energy by minimizing data movement.

Application-Level Optimization: Optimizing algorithms and applications to reduce computational complexity and memory access patterns can lead to energy savings. By designing efficient algorithms that minimize redundant computations and memory accesses, the overall energy consumption of the system can be reduced.

By combining architectural optimizations, dynamic power management techniques, data compression strategies, and application-level optimizations, the energy efficiency of the PiM system can be significantly improved, mitigating the impact of the energy overhead associated with ECC updates.