Loop-level parallelism

Last updated

Loop-level parallelism is a form of parallelism in software programming that is concerned with extracting parallel tasks from loops. The opportunity for loop-level parallelism often arises in computing programs where data is stored in random access data structures. Where a sequential program will iterate over the data structure and operate on indices one at a time, a program exploiting loop-level parallelism will use multiple threads or processes which operate on some or all of the indices at the same time. Such parallelism provides a speedup to overall execution time of the program, typically in line with Amdahl's law.



For simple loops, where each iteration is independent of the others, loop-level parallelism can be embarrassingly parallel, as parallelizing only requires assigning a process to handle each iteration. However, many algorithms are designed to run sequentially, and fail when parallel processes race due to dependence within the code. Sequential algorithms are sometimes applicable to parallel contexts with slight modification. Usually, though, they require process synchronization. Synchronization can be either implicit, via message passing, or explicit, via synchronization primitives like semaphores.


Consider the following code operating on a list L of length n.

for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {     S1: L[i] = L[i] + 10; } 

Each iteration of the loop takes the value from the current index of L, and increments it by 10. If statement S1 takes T time to execute, then the loop takes time n * T to execute sequentially, ignoring time taken by loop constructs. Now, consider a system with p processors where p > n. If n threads run in parallel, the time to execute all n steps is reduced to T.

Less simple cases produce inconsistent, i.e. non-serializable outcomes. Consider the following loop operating on the same list L.

for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {     S1: L[i] = L[i - 1] + 10; } 

Each iteration sets the current index to be the value of the previous plus ten. When run sequentially, each iteration is guaranteed that the previous iteration will already have the correct value. With multiple threads, process scheduling and other considerations prevent the execution order from guaranteeing an iteration will execute only after its dependence is met. It very well may happen before, leading to unexpected results. Serializability can be restored by adding synchronization to preserve the dependence on previous iterations.

Dependencies in code

There are several types of dependences that can be found within code. [1] [2]

True (Flow) DependenceS1 ->T S2A true dependence between S1 and S2 means that S1 writes to a location later read from by S2
Anti DependenceS1 ->A S2An anti-dependence between S1 and S2 means that S1 reads from a location later written to by S2.
Output DependenceS1 ->O S2An output dependence between S1 and S2 means that S1 and S2 write to the same location.
Input DependenceS1 ->I S2An input dependence between S1 and S2 means that S1 and S2 read from the same location.

In order to preserve the sequential behaviour of a loop when run in parallel, True Dependence must be preserved. Anti-Dependence and Output Dependence can be dealt with by giving each process its own copy of variables (known as privatization). [1]

Example of true dependence

S1: int a, b; S2: a = 2; S3: b = a + 40; 

S2 ->T S3, meaning that S2 has a true dependence on S3 because S2 writes to the variable a, which S3 reads from.

Example of anti-dependence

S1: int a, b = 40; S2: a = b - 38; S3: b = -1; 

S2 ->A S3, meaning that S2 has an anti-dependence on S3 because S2 reads from the variable b before S3 writes to it.

Example of output-dependence

S1: int a, b = 40; S2: a = b - 38; S3: a = 2; 

S2 ->O S3, meaning that S2 has an output dependence on S3 because both write to the variable a.

Example of input-dependence

S1: int a, b, c = 2; S2: a = c - 1; S3: b = c + 1; 

S2 ->I S3, meaning that S2 has an input dependence on S3 because S2 and S3 both read from variable c.

Dependence in loops

Loop-carried vs loop-independent dependence

Loops can have two types of dependence:

In loop-independent dependence, loops have inter-iteration dependence, but do not have dependence between iterations. Each iteration may be treated as a block and performed in parallel without other synchronization efforts.

In the following example code used for swapping the values of two array of length n, there is a loop-independent dependence of S1 ->T S3.

for (int i = 1; i < n; i ++) {     S1: tmp = a[i];     S2: a[i] = b[i];     S3: b[i] = tmp; } 

In loop-carried dependence, statements in an iteration of a loop depend on statements in another iteration of the loop. Loop-Carried Dependence uses a modified version of the dependence notation seen earlier.

Example of loop-carried dependence where S1[i] ->T S1[i + 1], where i indicates the current iteration, and i + 1 indicates the next iteration.

for (int i = 1; i < n; i ++) {     S1: a[i] = a[i - 1] + 1; } 

Loop carried dependence graph

A Loop-carried dependence graph graphically shows the loop-carried dependencies between iterations. Each iteration is listed as a node on the graph, and directed edges show the true, anti, and output dependencies between each iteration.


There are a variety of methodologies for parallelizing loops.

Each implementation varies slightly in how threads synchronize, if at all. In addition, parallel tasks must somehow be mapped to a process. These tasks can either be allocated statically or dynamically. Research has shown that load-balancing can be better achieved through some dynamic allocation algorithms than when done statically. [4]

The process of parallelizing a sequential program can be broken down into the following discrete steps. [1] Each concrete loop-parallelization below implicitly performs them.

DecompositionThe program is broken down into tasks, the smallest exploitable unit of concurrence.
AssignmentTasks are assigned to processes.
OrchestrationData access, communication, and synchronization of processes.
MappingProcesses are bound to processors.


When a loop has a loop-carried dependence, one way to parallelize it is to distribute the loop into several different loops. Statements that are not dependent on each other are separated so that these distributed loops can be executed in parallel. For example, consider the following code.

for (int i = 1; i < n; i ++) {     S1: a[i] = a[i -1] + b[i];     S2: c[i] = c[i] + d[i]; } 

The loop has a loop carried dependence S1[i] ->T S1[i + 1] but S2 and S1 do not have a loop-independent dependence so we can rewrite the code as follows.

loop1: for (int i = 1; i < n; i ++) {     S1: a[i] = a[i -1] + b[i]; } loop2: for (int i = 1; i < n; i ++) {     S2: c[i] = c[i] + d[i]; } 

Note that now loop1 and loop2 can be executed in parallel. Instead of single instruction being performed in parallel on different data as in data level parallelism, here different loops perform different tasks on different data. Let's say the time of execution of S1 and S2 be and then the execution time for sequential form of above code is , Now because we split the two statements and put them in two different loops, gives us an execution time of . We call this type of parallelism either function or task parallelism.

DOALL parallelism

DOALL parallelism exists when statements within a loop can be executed independently (situations where there is no loop-carried dependence). [1] For example, the following code does not read from the array a, and does not update the arrays b, c. No iterations have a dependence on any other iteration.

for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {     S1: a[i] = b[i] + c[i]; } 

Let's say the time of one execution of S1 be then the execution time for sequential form of above code is , Now because DOALL Parallelism exists when all iterations are independent, speed-up may be achieved by executing all iterations in parallel which gives us an execution time of , which is the time taken for one iteration in sequential execution.

The following example, using a simplified pseudo code, shows how a loop might be parallelized to execute each iteration independently.

begin_parallelism(); for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {     S1: a[i] = b[i] + c[i];     end_parallelism(); } block(); 

DOACROSS parallelism

DOACROSS Parallelism exists where iterations of a loop are parallelized by extracting calculations that can be performed independently and running them simultaneously. [5]

Synchronization exists to enforce loop-carried dependence.

Consider the following, synchronous loop with dependence S1[i] ->T S1[i + 1].

for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {     a[i] = a[i - 1] + b[i] + 1; } 

Each loop iteration performs two actions

Calculating the value a[i - 1] + b[i] + 1, and then performing the assignment can be decomposed into two lines(statements S1 and S2):

S1: int tmp = b[i] + 1; S2: a[i] = a[i - 1] + tmp; 

The first line, int tmp = b[i] + 1;, has no loop-carried dependence. The loop can then be parallelized by computing the temp value in parallel, and then synchronizing the assignment to a[i].

post(0); for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {      S1: int tmp = b[i] + 1;     wait(i - 1);      S2: a[i] = a[i - 1] + tmp;     post(i); } 

Let's say the time of execution of S1 and S2 be and then the execution time for sequential form of above code is , Now because DOACROSS Parallelism exists, speed-up may be achieved by executing iterations in a pipelined fashion which gives us an execution time of .

DOPIPE parallelism

DOPIPE Parallelism implements pipelined parallelism for loop-carried dependence where a loop iteration is distributed over multiple, synchronized loops. [1] The goal of DOPIPE is to act like an assembly line, where one stage is started as soon as there is sufficient data available for it from the previous stage. [6]

Consider the following, synchronous code with dependence S1[i] ->T S1[i + 1].

for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {     S1: a[i] = a[i - 1] + b[i];     S2: c[i] = c[i] + a[i]; } 

S1 must be executed sequentially, but S2 has no loop-carried dependence. S2 could be executed in parallel using DOALL Parallelism after performing all calculations needed by S1 in series. However, the speedup is limited if this is done. A better approach is to parallelize such that the S2 corresponding to each S1 executes when said S1 is finished.

Implementing pipelined parallelism results in the following set of loops, where the second loop may execute for an index as soon as the first loop has finished its corresponding index.

for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {     S1: a[i] = a[i - 1] + b[i];         post(i); }  for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {         wait(i);     S2: c[i] = c[i] + a[i]; } 

Let's say the time of execution of S1 and S2 be and then the execution time for sequential form of above code is , Now because DOPIPE Parallelism exists, speed-up may be achieved by executing iterations in a pipelined fashion which gives us an execution time of , where p is the number of processor in parallel.

See also

Related Research Articles

OpenMP open standard for parallelizing

OpenMP is an application programming interface (API) that supports multi-platform shared memory multiprocessing programming in C, C++, and Fortran, on many platforms, instruction set architectures and operating systems, including Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, Linux, macOS, and Windows. It consists of a set of compiler directives, library routines, and environment variables that influence run-time behavior.

Cilk, Cilk++ and Cilk Plus are general-purpose programming languages designed for multithreaded parallel computing. They are based on the C and C++ programming languages, which they extend with constructs to express parallel loops and the fork–join idiom.

Loop unrolling, also known as loop unwinding, is a loop transformation technique that attempts to optimize a program's execution speed at the expense of its binary size, which is an approach known as space–time tradeoff. The transformation can be undertaken manually by the programmer or by an optimizing compiler.

In compiler theory, loop optimization is the process of increasing execution speed and reducing the overheads associated with loops. It plays an important role in improving cache performance and making effective use of parallel processing capabilities. Most execution time of a scientific program is spent on loops; as such, many compiler optimization techniques have been developed to make them faster.

Loop dependence analysis is a process which can be used to find dependencies within iterations of a loop with the goal of determining different relationships between statements. These dependent relationships are tied to the order in which different statements access memory locations. Using the analysis of these relationships, execution of the loop can be organized to allow multiple processors to work on different portions of the loop in parallel. This is known as parallel processing. In general, loops can consume a lot of processing time when executed as serial code. Through parallel processing, it is possible to reduce the total execution time of a program through sharing the processing load among multiple processors.

In computer science, gang scheduling is a scheduling algorithm for parallel systems that schedules related threads or processes to run simultaneously on different processors. Usually these will be threads all belonging to the same process, but they may also be from different processes. For example, when the processes have a producer-consumer relationship, or when they all come from the same MPI program.

Automatic parallelization, also auto parallelization, autoparallelization, or parallelization, the last one of which implies automation when used in context, refers to converting sequential code into multi-threaded or vectorized code in order to utilize multiple processors simultaneously in a shared-memory multiprocessor (SMP) machine. The goal of automatic parallelization is to relieve programmers from the hectic and error-prone manual parallelization process. Though the quality of automatic parallelization has improved in the past several decades, fully automatic parallelization of sequential programs by compilers remains a grand challenge due to its need for complex program analysis and the unknown factors during compilation.

BMDFM software

BMDFM is software that enables running an application in parallel on shared memory symmetric multiprocessors (SMP) using the multiple processors to speed up the execution of single applications. BMDFM automatically identifies and exploits parallelism due to the static and mainly DYNAMIC SCHEDULING of the dataflow instruction sequences derived from the formerly sequential program.

Automatic vectorization, in parallel computing, is a special case of automatic parallelization, where a computer program is converted from a scalar implementation, which processes a single pair of operands at a time, to a vector implementation, which processes one operation on multiple pairs of operands at once. For example, modern conventional computers, including specialized supercomputers, typically have vector operations that simultaneously perform operations such as the following four additions :

A data dependency in computer science is a situation in which a program statement (instruction) refers to the data of a preceding statement. In compiler theory, the technique used to discover data dependencies among statements is called dependence analysis.

Data parallelism

Data parallelism is parallelization across multiple processors in parallel computing environments. It focuses on distributing the data across different nodes, which operate on the data in parallel. It can be applied on regular data structures like arrays and matrices by working on each element in parallel. It contrasts to task parallelism as another form of parallelism.

In compiler theory of computer science, A Greatest common divisor Test is the test used in study of loop optimization and loop dependence analysis to test the dependency between loop statements.

Parallel metaheuristic is a class of techniques that are capable of reducing both the numerical effort and the run time of a metaheuristic. To this end, concepts and technologies from the field of parallelism in computer science are used to enhance and even completely modify the behavior of existing metaheuristics. Just as it exists a long list of metaheuristics like evolutionary algorithms, particle swarm, ant colony optimization, simulated annealing, etc. it also exists a large set of different techniques strongly or loosely based in these ones, whose behavior encompasses the multiple parallel execution of algorithm components that cooperate in some way to solve a problem on a given parallel hardware platform.

Use of the polyhedral model within a compiler requires software to represent the objects of this framework and perform operations upon them.

Software is said to exhibit scalable parallelism if it can make use of additional processors to solve larger problems, i.e. this term refers to software for which Gustafson's law holds. Consider a program whose execution time is dominated by one or more loops, each of that updates every element of an array --- for example, the following finite difference heat equation stencil calculation:

for t := 0 to T dofor i := 1 to N-1 do  new(i) := * .25  // explicit forward-difference with R = 0.25  endfor i := 1 to N-1 do  A(i) := new(i)  endend

This article discusses the analysis of parallel algorithms. Like in the analysis of "ordinary", sequential, algorithms, one is typically interested in asymptotic bounds on the resource consumption, but the analysis is performed in the presence of multiple processor units that cooperate to perform computations. Thus, one can determine not only how many "steps" a computation takes, but also how much faster it becomes as the number of processors goes up. Interestingly, the analysis approach works by first suppressing the number of processors. The next background paragraph explains how the abstraction of the number of processors first emerged.

Lyra2 is a password hashing scheme (PHS) that can also work as a key derivation function (KDF). It received a special recognition during the Password Hashing Competition in July 2015., which was won by Argon2. Besides being used for its original purposes, it is also in the core of proof-of-work algorithms such as Lyra2REv2, adopted by Vertcoin, MonaCoin, among other cryptocurrencies

DOPIPE parallelism is a method to perform loop-level parallelism by pipelining the statements in a loop. Pipelined parallelism may exist at different levels of abstraction like loops, functions and algorithmic stages. The extent of parallelism depends upon the programmers' ability to make best use of this concept. It also depends upon factors like identifying and separating the independent tasks and executing them parallelly.

Privatization is a technique used in shared-memory programming to enable parallelism, by removing dependencies that occur across different threads in a parallel program. Dependencies within threads occur due to the presence of variables that are written and/or read by different threads at the same time during execution. This basic principle of this technique is making private copies of a variable shared by multiple threads, hence making each thread capable to operate on its local copy of this variable rather than a shared one.

DOACROSS parallelism is a parallelization technique used to perform Loop-level parallelism by utilizing synchronisation primitives between statements in a loop. This technique is used when a loop cannot be fully parallelized by DOALL parallelism due to data dependencies between loop iterations, typically loop-carried dependencies. The sections of the loop which contain loop-carried dependence are synchronized, while treating each section as a parallel task on its own. Therefore, DOACROSS parallelism can be used to complement DOALL parallelism to reduce loop execution times.


  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Solihin, Yan (2016). Fundamentals of Parallel Architecture. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. ISBN   978-1-4822-1118-4.
  2. Goff, Gina (1991). "Practical dependence testing". Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1991 conference on Programming language design and implementation - PLDI '91. pp. 15–29. doi:10.1145/113445.113448. ISBN   0897914287.
  3. Murphy, Niall. "Discovering and exploiting parallelism in DOACROSS loops" (PDF). University of Cambridge. Retrieved 10 September 2016.
  4. Kavi, Krishna. "Parallelization of DOALL and DOACROSS Loops-a Survey".Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  5. Unnikrishnan, Priya (2012), "A Practical Approach to DOACROSS Parallelization", Euro-Par 2012 Parallel Processing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7484, pp. 219–231, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32820-6_23, ISBN   978-3-642-32819-0
  6. "DoPipe: An Effective Approach to Parallelize Simulation" (PDF). Intel. Retrieved 13 September 2016.