CS274: Computer Architecture - Cache Simulator (100 Points)
Assignment Goals
The goals of this assignment are:- To simulate the effects of a computer cache
Background Reading and References
Please refer to the following readings and examples offering templates to help get you started:The Assignment
What to Do
Read a text file of the following format:
read 8
read 2012
write 564
Each line of text simulates a memory access to a given address. Write a program that simulates L1 cache, L2 cache, and main memory.
On a read, you should start at L1 cache and identify the address stored at a particular index given its tag. If it is a hit, return the value. If it is a miss, move on to the next level of cache, and then to main memory.
If you hit at L2 or retrieve from main memory, copy the value to the appropriate location in L2 and L1 cache. Use a least-recently-used strategy to replace cache blocks.
You will use a write-back strategy such that, on cache replacement, you should write the value to the next lowest level of memory (for example, L2 from L1, or main memory from L2), if and only if the value has been written to (also know as being “dirty”).
Allow the user to configure your cache using user inputs for the overall size, set associativity, and number of words per block.
Design Questions to Help You Begin
Please answer the following questions in your README file before you begin writing your program.- Patterson and Hennessy Textbook Question 5.1
- Patterson and Hennessy Textbook Question 5.2
- Patterson and Hennessy Textbook Question 5.5
- Patterson and Hennessy Textbook Question 5.6.2 through 5.6.3
- Patterson and Hennessy Textbook Question 5.10.1, 5.10.2, and 5.10.4
- Patterson and Hennessy Textbook Question 5.11
Submission
In your submission, please include answers to any questions asked on the assignment page in your README file. If you wrote code as part of this assignment, please describe your design, approach, and implementation in your README file as well. Finally, include answers to the following questions:- Describe what you did, how you did it, what challenges you encountered, and how you solved them.
- Please answer any questions found throughout the narrative of this assignment.
- If collaboration with a buddy was permitted, did you work with a buddy on this assignment? If so, who? If not, do you certify that this submission represents your own original work?
- Please identify any and all portions of your submission that were not originally written by you (for example, code originally written by your buddy, or anything taken or adapted from a non-classroom resource). It is always OK to use your textbook and instructor notes; however, you are certifying that any portions not designated as coming from an outside person or source are your own original work.
- Approximately how many hours it took you to finish this assignment (I will not judge you for this at all...I am simply using it to gauge if the assignments are too easy or hard)?
- Your overall impression of the assignment. Did you love it, hate it, or were you neutral? One word answers are fine, but if you have any suggestions for the future let me know.
- Using the grading specifications on this page, discuss briefly the grade you would give yourself and why. Discuss each item in the grading specification.
- Any other concerns that you have. For instance, if you have a bug that you were unable to solve but you made progress, write that here. The more you articulate the problem the more partial credit you will receive (it is fine to leave this blank).
Assignment Rubric
| Description | Pre-Emerging (< 50%) | Beginning (50%) | Progressing (85%) | Proficient (100%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Algorithm Implementation (60%) | The algorithm fails on the test inputs due to major issues, or the program fails to compile and/or run | The algorithm fails on the test inputs due to one or more minor issues | The algorithm is implemented to solve the problem correctly according to given test inputs, but would fail if executed in a general case due to a minor issue or omission in the algorithm design or implementation, including a Makefile | A reasonable algorithm is implemented to solve the problem which correctly solves the problem according to the given test inputs, and would be reasonably expected to solve the problem in the general case |
| Code Quality and Documentation (20%) | Code commenting and structure are absent, or code structure departs significantly from best practice, and/or the code departs significantly from the style guide | Code commenting and structure is limited in ways that reduce the readability of the program, and/or there are minor departures from the style guide | Code documentation is present that re-states the explicit code definitions, and/or code is written that mostly adheres to the style guide | Code is documented at non-trivial points in a manner that enhances the readability of the program, and code is written according to the style guide |
| Writeup and Submission (20%) | An incomplete submission is provided | The program is submitted, but not according to the directions in one or more ways (for example, because it is lacking a readme writeup) | The program is submitted according to the directions with a minor omission or correction needed, and with at least superficial responses to the bolded questions throughout | The program is submitted according to the directions, including a readme writeup describing the solution, and thoughtful answers to the bolded or textbook questions throughout |
Please refer to the Style Guide for code quality examples and guidelines.