Ethernet: distributed packet switching for local computer networks
Communications of the ACM
Computer Engineering; A DEC View of Hardware Systems Design
Computer Engineering; A DEC View of Hardware Systems Design
Hardware scheduling strategies for systems with many processors.
Hardware scheduling strategies for systems with many processors.
ISCA '88 Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Symposium on Computer architecture
Modeling a new technique for accessing shared buses
Proceedings of the Computer Network Performance Symposium
On the Load Balancing Bus Accessing Scheme
IEEE Transactions on Computers
Performance analysis of BusNet protocol for backplane bus-based interprocessor communication
Computer Communications
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Current multiprocessing systems are often organized by connecting several devices with similar characteristics (usually processors) to a common bus. These devices present access with minimal delay; access is controlled by the bus arbitration algorithm. This paper presents a probabilistic analysis of several arbitration algorithms according to several criteria that reflect their relative performances in (1) rendering equal service to all competing devices and (2) allocating available bus bandwidth efficiently. The sensitivity of these criteria to the number of devices on the bus, the speed of the bus, and the distribution of interrequest times is considered. A probabilistic model for the quantitative comparison of these algorithms is constructed in which multiple devices repeatedly issue bus requests at random intervals according to an arbitrary distribution function and are serviced according to one of the algorithms; the devices do not buffer bus requests. The algorithms studied include the static priority, fixed time slice (FTS), two dynamic priority, and first-come, first-served (FCFS) schemes. The performance measures are computed by simulation. The analysis reveals that under heavy bus loads, the dynamic priority and FCFS algorithms offer significantly better performances by these measures than do the static priority and FTS schemes.