2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpdc.2012.02.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Scalable architecture for a contention-free optical network on-chip

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
(60 reference statements)
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Optical links, on the other hand, require E/O and O/E conversions and on-the-fly propagation delay (t prop ), which take at least one clock cycle each (3 cycles in total). However, optical links leverage the signal propagation of light (11.4ps/mm for current technologies [14]), which is particularly beneficial for long-distance communication, especially because optical links, as opposed to electrical, do not require pipelining and do not introduce further distance-related latencies. For instance, with 11.4ps/mm propagation delay, data can be sent within one clock cycle to any core located at distances < 17.5mm assuming a core clock frequency of 5Ghz (200ps clock cycle).…”
Section: Latencymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Optical links, on the other hand, require E/O and O/E conversions and on-the-fly propagation delay (t prop ), which take at least one clock cycle each (3 cycles in total). However, optical links leverage the signal propagation of light (11.4ps/mm for current technologies [14]), which is particularly beneficial for long-distance communication, especially because optical links, as opposed to electrical, do not require pipelining and do not introduce further distance-related latencies. For instance, with 11.4ps/mm propagation delay, data can be sent within one clock cycle to any core located at distances < 17.5mm assuming a core clock frequency of 5Ghz (200ps clock cycle).…”
Section: Latencymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Non-blocking WRONoC topologies [24]- [27] provide simultaneous switching capability from each sender to each receiver. However, this requires (N − 1) filter-detector pairs (for N nodes) at each node, leading to a very limited scalability: µRing heater power and area increase quadratically with N. To tackle this issue, several blocking WRONoCs [28], [29]-including Amon [4]-have been proposed. These require only one filter-detector pair at each node and resolve contention by using a control network (CN).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, laser power is reduced by sharing wavelengths for addressing and providing collision-free paths in the network. CoNoC [28] first introduced this principle and has N/2 wavelengths for addressing. QuT [29] significantly improves upon CoNoC by splitting the wavelengths to N/4.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The optical Spidergon [10] is based on the Spidergon topology, which is a ring topology where, in addition to the ring, opposite nodes are connected. It uses an electrical control network, which could, however, be replaced by common optical control network solutions such as an MWSR bus.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Spidergon [10] and QuT [7] are recently proposed oNoC architectures, but both of them fail to scale particularly well according to the above challenges. Amon is an alternative, all-optical NoC design that overcomes their limitations as it targets low power and energy consumption by addressing these key issues.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%