More Like this

1. Low-Depth Parallel Algorithms for the Binary-Forking Model without Atomics

   Ahmad, Zafar ; Chowdhury, Rezaul ; Das, Rathish ; Ganapathi, Pramod ; Gregory, Aaron ; Javanmard, Mohammad Mahdi ( January 2021 , Annual ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures)

   The binary-forking model is a parallel computation model, formally defined by Blelloch et al., in which a thread can fork a concurrent child thread, recursively and asynchronously. The model incurs a cost of Theta(log n) to spawn or synchronize n tasks or threads. The binary-forking model realistically captures the performance of parallel algorithms implemented using modern multithreaded programming languages on multicore shared-memory machines. In contrast, the widely studied theoretical PRAM model does not consider the cost of spawning and synchronizing threads, and as a result, algorithms achieving optimal performance bounds in the PRAM model may not be optimal in the binary-forking model. Often, algorithms need to be redesigned to achieve optimal performance bounds in the binary-forking model and the non-constant synchronization cost makes the task challenging. In this paper, we show that in the binary-forking model we can achieve optimal or near-optimal span with negligible or no asymptotic blowup in work for comparison-based sorting, Strassen's matrix multiplication (MM), and the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). Our major results are as follows: (1) A randomized comparison-based sorting algorithm with optimal O(log n) span and O(nlog n) work, both w.h.p. in n. (2) An optimal O(log n) span algorithm for Strassen's matrix multiplication (MM) with only a loglog n - factor blow-up in work as well as a near-optimal O(log n loglog log n) span algorithm with no asymptotic blow-up in work. (3) A near-optimal O(log n logloglog n) span Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithm with less than a log n-factor blow-up in work for all practical values of n (i.e., n le 10 ^10,000) 

   more » « less
2. Low-Span Parallel Algorithms for the Binary-Forking Model

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3409964.3461802  

   Ahmad, Zafar ; Chowdhury, Rezaul ; Das, Rathish ; Ganapathi, Pramod ; Gregory, Aaron ; Javanmard, Mohammad Mahdi ( January 2021 , Proc. 33st ACM on Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA))

   null (Ed.)

   The binary-forking model is a parallel computation model, formally defined by Blelloch et al., in which a thread can fork a concurrent child thread, recursively and asynchronously. The model incurs a cost of Theta(log n) to spawn or synchronize n tasks or threads. The binary-forking model realistically captures the performance of parallel algorithms implemented using modern multithreaded programming languages on multicore shared-memory machines. In contrast, the widely studied theoretical PRAM model does not consider the cost of spawning and synchronizing threads, and as a result, algorithms achieving optimal performance bounds in the PRAM model may not be optimal in the binary-forking model. Often, algorithms need to be redesigned to achieve optimal performance bounds in the binary-forking model and the non-constant synchronization cost makes the task challenging. In this paper, we show that in the binary-forking model we can achieve optimal or near-optimal span with negligible or no asymptotic blowup in work for comparison-based sorting, Strassen's matrix multiplication (MM), and the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). Our major results are as follows: (1) A randomized comparison-based sorting algorithm with optimal O(log n) span and O(nlog n) work, both w.h.p. in n. (2) An optimal O(log n) span algorithm for Strassen's matrix multiplication (MM) with only a loglog n - factor blow-up in work as well as a near-optimal O(log n loglog log n) span algorithm with no asymptotic blow-up in work. (3) A near-optimal O(log n logloglog n) span Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithm with less than a log n-factor blow-up in work for all practical values of n (i.e., n le 10 ^10,000 ). 

   more » « less
3. Joinable Parallel Balanced Binary Trees

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3512769  

   Blelloch, Guy ; Ferizovic, Daniel ; Sun, Yihan ( June 2022 , ACM Transactions on Parallel Computing)

   In this article, we show how a single function,join, can be used to implement parallelbalanced binary search trees(BSTs) simply and efficiently. Based onjoin, our approach applies to multiple balanced tree data structures, and a variety of functions for ordered sets and maps. We describe our technique as an algorithmic framework calledjoin-based algorithms. We show that thejoinfunction fully captures what is needed for rebalancing trees for a variety of tree algorithms, as long as the balancing scheme satisfies certain properties, which we refer to asjoinabletrees. We discuss four balancing schemes that are joinable: AVL trees, red-black trees, weight-balanced trees, and treaps. We present a variety of tree algorithms that apply to joinable trees, includinginsert,delete,union,intersection,difference,split,range,filter, and so on, most of them also parallel. These algorithms are generic across balancing schemes. Many algorithms are optimal in the comparison model, and we provide a general proof to show the efficiency in work for joinable trees. The algorithms are highly parallel, all with polylogarithmic span (parallel dependence). Specifically, the set-set operationsunion,intersection, anddifferencehave work\( O(m\log (\frac{n}{m}+1)) \)and polylogarithmic span for input set sizes\( n \)and\( m\le n \).

   We implemented and tested our algorithms on the four balancing schemes. In general, all four schemes have quite similar performance, but the weight-balanced tree slightly outperforms the others. They have the same speedup characteristics, getting around 73\( \times \)speedup on 72 cores (144 hyperthreads). Experimental results also show that our implementation outperforms existing parallel implementations, and our sequential version achieves close or much better performance than the sequential merging algorithm in C++ Standard Template Library (STL) on various input sizes.

    

   more » « less
4. The Parallel Persistent Memory Model

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3210377.3210381  

   Blelloch, Guy E. ; Gibbons, Phillip B. ; Gu, Yan ; McGuffey, Charles ; Shun, Julian ( July 2018 , ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA))

   We consider a parallel computational model, the Parallel Persistent Memory model, comprised of P processors, each with a fast local ephemeral memory of limited size, and sharing a large persistent memory. The model allows for each processor to fault at any time (with bounded probability), and possibly restart. When a processor faults, all of its state and local ephemeral memory is lost, but the persistent memory remains. This model is motivated by upcoming non-volatile memories that are nearly as fast as existing random access memory, are accessible at the granularity of cache lines, and have the capability of surviving power outages. It is further motivated by the observation that in large parallel systems, failure of processors and their caches is not unusual. We present several results for the model, using an approach that breaks a computation into capsules, each of which can be safely run multiple times. For the single-processor version we describe how to simulate any program in the RAM, the external memory model, or the ideal cache model with an expected constant factor overhead. For the multiprocessor version we describe how to efficiently implement a work-stealing scheduler within the model such that it handles both soft faults, with a processor restarting, and hard faults, with a processor permanently failing. For any multithreaded fork-join computation that is race free, write-after-read conflict free and has W work, D depth, and C maximum capsule work in the absence of faults, the scheduler guarantees a time bound on the model of O(W/P_A+ (DP/P_A ) log_{1/(Cf )} W) in expectation, where P is the maximum number of processors, P_A is the average number, and f ≤ 1/(2C) is the probability a processor faults between successive persistent memory accesses. Within the model, and using the proposed methods, we develop efficient algorithms for parallel prefix sums, merging, sorting, and matrix multiply. 

   more » « less
5. Fast Stencil Computations using Fast Fourier Transforms

   Ahmad, Zafar ; Chowdhury, Rezaul ; Das, Rathish ; Ganapathi, Pramod ; Gregory, Aaron ; Zhu, Yimin ( January 2021 , Annual ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures)

   Stencil computations are widely used to simulate the change of state of physical systems across a multidimensional grid over multiple timesteps. The state-of-the-art techniques in this area fall into three groups: cache-aware tiled looping algorithms, cache-oblivious divide-and-conquer trapezoidal algorithms, and Krylov subspace methods. In this paper, we present two efficient parallel algorithms for performing linear stencil computations. Current direct solvers in this domain are computationally inefficient, and Krylov methods require manual labor and mathematical training. We solve these problems for linear stencils by using DFT preconditioning on a Krylov method to achieve a direct solver which is both fast and general. Indeed, while all currently available algorithms for solving general linear stencils perform Θ(NT) work, where N is the size of the spatial grid and T is the number of timesteps, our algorithms perform o(NT) work. To the best of our knowledge, we give the first algorithms that use fast Fourier transforms to compute final grid data by evolving the initial data for many timesteps at once. Our algorithms handle both periodic and aperiodic boundary conditions, and achieve polynomially better performance bounds (i.e., computational complexity and parallel runtime) than all other existing solutions. Initial experimental results show that implementations of our algorithms that evolve grids of roughly 10^7 cells for around 10^5 timesteps run orders of magnitude faster than state-of-the-art implementations for periodic stencil problems, and 1.3× to 8.5× faster for aperiodic stencil problems. 

   more » « less