Models and reconfiguration problems for multi task hyperreconfigurable architectures

Hyperreconfigurable architectures can adapt their reconfiguration abilities during run time and have been proposed to increase the speed of dynamic reconfiguration. They use two types of dynamic reconfiguration steps. In hyperreconfiguration steps they change their ability for reconfiguration and in ordinary reconfiguration steps they reconfigure the actual contexts for a computation within the limits that have been set by the last hyperreconfiguration step. We study the concept of partial hyperreconfiguration for multi tasks environments. We propose several models for partially hyperreconfigurable architectures and study corresponding reconfiguration problems to find optimal (hyper)reconfigurations. While under a general cost model the problem to find optimal (hyper)reconfigurations is known to be NP-complete even for a single task. We identify an interesting special case that can be solved by a polynomial time algorithm even for multiple tasks. We illustrate the introduced concepts with a partially hyperreconfigurable example architecture and describe the results of simulated runs with a small test application

Models, Design Methods and Tools for Improved Partial Dynamic Reconfiguration

Partial dynamic reconfiguration of FPGAs has attracted high attention from both academia and industry in recent years. With this technique, the functionality of the programmable devices can be adapted at runtime to changing requirements. The approach allows designers to use FPGAs more efficiently: E. g. FPGA resources can be time-shared between different functions and the functions itself can be adapted to changing workloads at runtime. Thus partial dynamic reconfiguration enables a unique combination of software-like flexibility and hardware-like performance. Still there exists no common understanding on how to assess the overhead introduced by partial dynamic reconfiguration. This dissertation presents a new cost model for both the runtime and the memory overhead that results from partial dynamic reconfiguration. It is shown how the model can be incorporated into all stages of the design optimization for reconfigurable hardware. In particular digital circuits can be mapped onto FPGAs such that only small fractions of the hardware must be reconfigured at runtime, which saves time, memory, and energy. The design optimization is most efficient if it is applied during high level synthesis. This book describes how the cost model has been integrated into a new high level synthesis tool. The tool allows the designer to trade-off FPGA resource use versus reconfiguration overhead. It is shown that partial reconfiguration causes only small overhead if the design is optimized with regard to reconfiguration cost. A wide range of experimental results is provided that demonstrates the benefits of the applied method.:1 Introduction 1 1.1 Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Reconfigurable System on a Chip (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Anatomy of an Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 RSOC Design Characteristics and Trade-offs . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Classification of Reconfigurable Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.1 Partial Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.2 Runtime Reconfiguration (RTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Multi-Context Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Fine-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Coarse-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.3 Reconfigurable Computing Specific Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Overview of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Reconfigurable Computing Systems – Background 17 2.1 Examples for RSOCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.2 Partially Reconfigurable FPGAs: Xilinx Virtex Device Family . . . . . . 20 2.2.1 Virtex-II/Virtex-II Pro Logic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.2 Reconfiguration Architecture and Reconfiguration Control . . 21 2.3 Methods for Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Behavioural Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.2 Design Entry at Register-Transfer Level (RTL) . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Xilinx Early Access Partial Reconfiguration Design Flow . . . . 26 2.4 Task Management in Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.4.1 Online and Offline Task Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.2 Task Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.3 Task Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.4 Reconfiguration Runtime Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5 Configuration Data Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Evaluation of Reconfigurable Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Energy Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Area Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6.3 Runtime Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.7 Similarity Based Reduction of Reconfiguration Overhead . . . . . . . . 38 2.7.1 Configuration Data Generation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.7.2 Device Mapping Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.7.3 Circuit Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.7.4 Model for Partial Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.8 Contributions of this Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 Runtime Reconfiguration Cost and Optimization Methods 47 3.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 Reconfiguration State Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Reconfiguration Time Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.2.2 Dynamic Configuration Data Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.3 Configuration Cost at Bitstream Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.4 Configuration Cost at Structural Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4.2 Virtual Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.3 Reconfiguration Costs in the VA Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.5 Allocation Functions with Minimal Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . 67 3.5.1 Allocation of Node Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5.2 Direct Allocation of Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.5.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4 Implementation Tools for Reconfigurable Computing 95 4.1 Mapping of Netlists to FPGA Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.1 Mapping to Device Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.2 Connectivity Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 4.1.3 Mapping Variants and Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.4 Mapping of Circuit Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.1.5 Global Interconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 4.1.6 Netlist Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2 Mapping Aware Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2.1 Generalized Node Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.2 Successive Node Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.2.3 Node Allocation with Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . 107 4.2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.3 Netlist Mapping with Minimized Reconfiguration Cost . . . . . . . . . 110 4.3.1 Mapping Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.3.2 Mapping and Packing of Elements into Logic Blocks . . . . . . 112 4.3.3 Logic Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.3.4 Logic Element Selection for Min. Routing Reconfiguration . . 115 4.3.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5 High-Level Synthesis for Reconfigurable Computing 125 5.1 Introduction to HLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.1 HLS Tool Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.2 Realization of the Hardware Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 New Concepts for Task-based Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5.2.1 Multiple Hardware Tasks in one Reconfigurable Module . . . . 132 5.2.2 Multi-Level Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.2.3 Resource Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.3 Datapath Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.1 Task Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.2 Resource Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.3 Resource Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.4 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 5.3.5 Constraints for Scheduling and Resource Binding . . . . . . . . 151 5.4 Reconfiguration Optimized Datapath Implementation . . . . . . . . . . 153 5.4.1 Effects of Scheduling and Binding on Reconfiguration Costs . 153 5.4.2 Strategies for Resource Type Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 5.4.3 Strategies for Resource Instance Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 5.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.1 Summary of Binding Methods and Tool Setup . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.2 Cost Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.5.3 Implementation Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 5.5.4 Benchmark Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5.5.5 Benchmark Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5.5.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 5.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6 Summary and Outlook 185 Bibliography 189 A Simulated Annealing 201Partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration von FPGAs hat in den letzten Jahren große Aufmerksamkeit von Wissenschaft und Industrie auf sich gezogen. Die Technik erlaubt es, die Funktionalität von progammierbaren Bausteinen zur Laufzeit an veränderte Anforderungen anzupassen. Dynamische Rekonfiguration erlaubt es Entwicklern, FPGAs effizienter einzusetzen: z.B. können Ressourcen für verschiedene Funktionen wiederverwendet werden und die Funktionen selbst können zur Laufzeit an veränderte Verarbeitungsschritte angepasst werden. Insgesamt erlaubt partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration eine einzigartige Kombination von software-artiger Flexibilität und hardware-artiger Leistungsfähigkeit. Bis heute gibt es keine Übereinkunft darüber, wie der zusätzliche Aufwand, der durch partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration verursacht wird, zu bewerten ist. Diese Dissertation führt ein neues Kostenmodell für Laufzeit und Speicherbedarf ein, welche durch partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration verursacht wird. Es wird aufgezeigt, wie das Modell in alle Ebenen der Entwurfsoptimierung für rekonfigurierbare Hardware einbezogen werden kann. Insbesondere wird gezeigt, wie digitale Schaltungen derart auf FPGAs abgebildet werden können, sodass nur wenig Ressourcen der Hardware zur Laufzeit rekonfiguriert werden müssen. Dadurch kann Zeit, Speicher und Energie eingespart werden. Die Entwurfsoptimierung ist am effektivsten, wenn sie auf der Ebene der High-Level-Synthese angewendet wird. Diese Arbeit beschreibt, wie das Kostenmodell in ein neuartiges Werkzeug für die High-Level-Synthese integriert wurde. Das Werkzeug erlaubt es, beim Entwurf die Nutzung von FPGA-Ressourcen gegen den Rekonfigurationsaufwand abzuwägen. Es wird gezeigt, dass partielle Rekonfiguration nur wenig Kosten verursacht, wenn der Entwurf bezüglich Rekonfigurationskosten optimiert wird. Eine Anzahl von Beispielen und experimentellen Ergebnissen belegt die Vorteile der angewendeten Methodik.:1 Introduction 1 1.1 Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Reconfigurable System on a Chip (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Anatomy of an Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 RSOC Design Characteristics and Trade-offs . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Classification of Reconfigurable Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.1 Partial Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.2 Runtime Reconfiguration (RTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Multi-Context Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Fine-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Coarse-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.3 Reconfigurable Computing Specific Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Overview of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Reconfigurable Computing Systems – Background 17 2.1 Examples for RSOCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.2 Partially Reconfigurable FPGAs: Xilinx Virtex Device Family . . . . . . 20 2.2.1 Virtex-II/Virtex-II Pro Logic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.2 Reconfiguration Architecture and Reconfiguration Control . . 21 2.3 Methods for Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Behavioural Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.2 Design Entry at Register-Transfer Level (RTL) . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Xilinx Early Access Partial Reconfiguration Design Flow . . . . 26 2.4 Task Management in Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.4.1 Online and Offline Task Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.2 Task Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.3 Task Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.4 Reconfiguration Runtime Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5 Configuration Data Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Evaluation of Reconfigurable Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Energy Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Area Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6.3 Runtime Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.7 Similarity Based Reduction of Reconfiguration Overhead . . . . . . . . 38 2.7.1 Configuration Data Generation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.7.2 Device Mapping Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.7.3 Circuit Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.7.4 Model for Partial Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.8 Contributions of this Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 Runtime Reconfiguration Cost and Optimization Methods 47 3.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 Reconfiguration State Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Reconfiguration Time Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.2.2 Dynamic Configuration Data Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.3 Configuration Cost at Bitstream Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.4 Configuration Cost at Structural Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4.2 Virtual Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.3 Reconfiguration Costs in the VA Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.5 Allocation Functions with Minimal Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . 67 3.5.1 Allocation of Node Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5.2 Direct Allocation of Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.5.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4 Implementation Tools for Reconfigurable Computing 95 4.1 Mapping of Netlists to FPGA Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.1 Mapping to Device Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.2 Connectivity Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 4.1.3 Mapping Variants and Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.4 Mapping of Circuit Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.1.5 Global Interconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 4.1.6 Netlist Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2 Mapping Aware Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2.1 Generalized Node Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.2 Successive Node Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.2.3 Node Allocation with Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . 107 4.2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.3 Netlist Mapping with Minimized Reconfiguration Cost . . . . . . . . . 110 4.3.1 Mapping Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.3.2 Mapping and Packing of Elements into Logic Blocks . . . . . . 112 4.3.3 Logic Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.3.4 Logic Element Selection for Min. Routing Reconfiguration . . 115 4.3.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5 High-Level Synthesis for Reconfigurable Computing 125 5.1 Introduction to HLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.1 HLS Tool Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.2 Realization of the Hardware Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 New Concepts for Task-based Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5.2.1 Multiple Hardware Tasks in one Reconfigurable Module . . . . 132 5.2.2 Multi-Level Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.2.3 Resource Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.3 Datapath Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.1 Task Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.2 Resource Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.3 Resource Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.4 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 5.3.5 Constraints for Scheduling and Resource Binding . . . . . . . . 151 5.4 Reconfiguration Optimized Datapath Implementation . . . . . . . . . . 153 5.4.1 Effects of Scheduling and Binding on Reconfiguration Costs . 153 5.4.2 Strategies for Resource Type Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 5.4.3 Strategies for Resource Instance Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 5.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.1 Summary of Binding Methods and Tool Setup . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.2 Cost Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.5.3 Implementation Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 5.5.4 Benchmark Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5.5.5 Benchmark Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5.5.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 5.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6 Summary and Outlook 185 Bibliography 189 A Simulated Annealing 20

Models, Design Methods and Tools for Improved Partial Dynamic Reconfiguration

Partial dynamic reconfiguration of FPGAs has attracted high attention from both academia and industry in recent years. With this technique, the functionality of the programmable devices can be adapted at runtime to changing requirements. The approach allows designers to use FPGAs more efficiently: E. g. FPGA resources can be time-shared between different functions and the functions itself can be adapted to changing workloads at runtime. Thus partial dynamic reconfiguration enables a unique combination of software-like flexibility and hardware-like performance. Still there exists no common understanding on how to assess the overhead introduced by partial dynamic reconfiguration. This dissertation presents a new cost model for both the runtime and the memory overhead that results from partial dynamic reconfiguration. It is shown how the model can be incorporated into all stages of the design optimization for reconfigurable hardware. In particular digital circuits can be mapped onto FPGAs such that only small fractions of the hardware must be reconfigured at runtime, which saves time, memory, and energy. The design optimization is most efficient if it is applied during high level synthesis. This book describes how the cost model has been integrated into a new high level synthesis tool. The tool allows the designer to trade-off FPGA resource use versus reconfiguration overhead. It is shown that partial reconfiguration causes only small overhead if the design is optimized with regard to reconfiguration cost. A wide range of experimental results is provided that demonstrates the benefits of the applied method.:1 Introduction 1 1.1 Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Reconfigurable System on a Chip (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Anatomy of an Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 RSOC Design Characteristics and Trade-offs . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Classification of Reconfigurable Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.1 Partial Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.2 Runtime Reconfiguration (RTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Multi-Context Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Fine-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Coarse-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.3 Reconfigurable Computing Specific Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Overview of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Reconfigurable Computing Systems – Background 17 2.1 Examples for RSOCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.2 Partially Reconfigurable FPGAs: Xilinx Virtex Device Family . . . . . . 20 2.2.1 Virtex-II/Virtex-II Pro Logic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.2 Reconfiguration Architecture and Reconfiguration Control . . 21 2.3 Methods for Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Behavioural Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.2 Design Entry at Register-Transfer Level (RTL) . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Xilinx Early Access Partial Reconfiguration Design Flow . . . . 26 2.4 Task Management in Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.4.1 Online and Offline Task Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.2 Task Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.3 Task Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.4 Reconfiguration Runtime Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5 Configuration Data Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Evaluation of Reconfigurable Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Energy Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Area Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6.3 Runtime Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.7 Similarity Based Reduction of Reconfiguration Overhead . . . . . . . . 38 2.7.1 Configuration Data Generation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.7.2 Device Mapping Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.7.3 Circuit Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.7.4 Model for Partial Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.8 Contributions of this Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 Runtime Reconfiguration Cost and Optimization Methods 47 3.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 Reconfiguration State Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Reconfiguration Time Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.2.2 Dynamic Configuration Data Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.3 Configuration Cost at Bitstream Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.4 Configuration Cost at Structural Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4.2 Virtual Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.3 Reconfiguration Costs in the VA Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.5 Allocation Functions with Minimal Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . 67 3.5.1 Allocation of Node Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5.2 Direct Allocation of Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.5.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4 Implementation Tools for Reconfigurable Computing 95 4.1 Mapping of Netlists to FPGA Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.1 Mapping to Device Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.2 Connectivity Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 4.1.3 Mapping Variants and Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.4 Mapping of Circuit Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.1.5 Global Interconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 4.1.6 Netlist Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2 Mapping Aware Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2.1 Generalized Node Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.2 Successive Node Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.2.3 Node Allocation with Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . 107 4.2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.3 Netlist Mapping with Minimized Reconfiguration Cost . . . . . . . . . 110 4.3.1 Mapping Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.3.2 Mapping and Packing of Elements into Logic Blocks . . . . . . 112 4.3.3 Logic Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.3.4 Logic Element Selection for Min. Routing Reconfiguration . . 115 4.3.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5 High-Level Synthesis for Reconfigurable Computing 125 5.1 Introduction to HLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.1 HLS Tool Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.2 Realization of the Hardware Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 New Concepts for Task-based Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5.2.1 Multiple Hardware Tasks in one Reconfigurable Module . . . . 132 5.2.2 Multi-Level Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.2.3 Resource Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.3 Datapath Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.1 Task Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.2 Resource Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.3 Resource Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.4 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 5.3.5 Constraints for Scheduling and Resource Binding . . . . . . . . 151 5.4 Reconfiguration Optimized Datapath Implementation . . . . . . . . . . 153 5.4.1 Effects of Scheduling and Binding on Reconfiguration Costs . 153 5.4.2 Strategies for Resource Type Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 5.4.3 Strategies for Resource Instance Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 5.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.1 Summary of Binding Methods and Tool Setup . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.2 Cost Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.5.3 Implementation Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 5.5.4 Benchmark Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5.5.5 Benchmark Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5.5.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 5.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6 Summary and Outlook 185 Bibliography 189 A Simulated Annealing 201Partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration von FPGAs hat in den letzten Jahren große Aufmerksamkeit von Wissenschaft und Industrie auf sich gezogen. Die Technik erlaubt es, die Funktionalität von progammierbaren Bausteinen zur Laufzeit an veränderte Anforderungen anzupassen. Dynamische Rekonfiguration erlaubt es Entwicklern, FPGAs effizienter einzusetzen: z.B. können Ressourcen für verschiedene Funktionen wiederverwendet werden und die Funktionen selbst können zur Laufzeit an veränderte Verarbeitungsschritte angepasst werden. Insgesamt erlaubt partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration eine einzigartige Kombination von software-artiger Flexibilität und hardware-artiger Leistungsfähigkeit. Bis heute gibt es keine Übereinkunft darüber, wie der zusätzliche Aufwand, der durch partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration verursacht wird, zu bewerten ist. Diese Dissertation führt ein neues Kostenmodell für Laufzeit und Speicherbedarf ein, welche durch partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration verursacht wird. Es wird aufgezeigt, wie das Modell in alle Ebenen der Entwurfsoptimierung für rekonfigurierbare Hardware einbezogen werden kann. Insbesondere wird gezeigt, wie digitale Schaltungen derart auf FPGAs abgebildet werden können, sodass nur wenig Ressourcen der Hardware zur Laufzeit rekonfiguriert werden müssen. Dadurch kann Zeit, Speicher und Energie eingespart werden. Die Entwurfsoptimierung ist am effektivsten, wenn sie auf der Ebene der High-Level-Synthese angewendet wird. Diese Arbeit beschreibt, wie das Kostenmodell in ein neuartiges Werkzeug für die High-Level-Synthese integriert wurde. Das Werkzeug erlaubt es, beim Entwurf die Nutzung von FPGA-Ressourcen gegen den Rekonfigurationsaufwand abzuwägen. Es wird gezeigt, dass partielle Rekonfiguration nur wenig Kosten verursacht, wenn der Entwurf bezüglich Rekonfigurationskosten optimiert wird. Eine Anzahl von Beispielen und experimentellen Ergebnissen belegt die Vorteile der angewendeten Methodik.:1 Introduction 1 1.1 Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Reconfigurable System on a Chip (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Anatomy of an Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 RSOC Design Characteristics and Trade-offs . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Classification of Reconfigurable Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.1 Partial Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.2 Runtime Reconfiguration (RTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Multi-Context Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Fine-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Coarse-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.3 Reconfigurable Computing Specific Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Overview of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Reconfigurable Computing Systems – Background 17 2.1 Examples for RSOCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.2 Partially Reconfigurable FPGAs: Xilinx Virtex Device Family . . . . . . 20 2.2.1 Virtex-II/Virtex-II Pro Logic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.2 Reconfiguration Architecture and Reconfiguration Control . . 21 2.3 Methods for Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Behavioural Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.2 Design Entry at Register-Transfer Level (RTL) . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Xilinx Early Access Partial Reconfiguration Design Flow . . . . 26 2.4 Task Management in Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.4.1 Online and Offline Task Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.2 Task Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.3 Task Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.4 Reconfiguration Runtime Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5 Configuration Data Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Evaluation of Reconfigurable Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Energy Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Area Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6.3 Runtime Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.7 Similarity Based Reduction of Reconfiguration Overhead . . . . . . . . 38 2.7.1 Configuration Data Generation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.7.2 Device Mapping Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.7.3 Circuit Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.7.4 Model for Partial Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.8 Contributions of this Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 Runtime Reconfiguration Cost and Optimization Methods 47 3.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 Reconfiguration State Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Reconfiguration Time Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.2.2 Dynamic Configuration Data Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.3 Configuration Cost at Bitstream Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.4 Configuration Cost at Structural Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4.2 Virtual Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.3 Reconfiguration Costs in the VA Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.5 Allocation Functions with Minimal Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . 67 3.5.1 Allocation of Node Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5.2 Direct Allocation of Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.5.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4 Implementation Tools for Reconfigurable Computing 95 4.1 Mapping of Netlists to FPGA Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.1 Mapping to Device Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.2 Connectivity Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 4.1.3 Mapping Variants and Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.4 Mapping of Circuit Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.1.5 Global Interconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 4.1.6 Netlist Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2 Mapping Aware Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2.1 Generalized Node Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.2 Successive Node Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.2.3 Node Allocation with Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . 107 4.2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.3 Netlist Mapping with Minimized Reconfiguration Cost . . . . . . . . . 110 4.3.1 Mapping Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.3.2 Mapping and Packing of Elements into Logic Blocks . . . . . . 112 4.3.3 Logic Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.3.4 Logic Element Selection for Min. Routing Reconfiguration . . 115 4.3.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5 High-Level Synthesis for Reconfigurable Computing 125 5.1 Introduction to HLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.1 HLS Tool Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.2 Realization of the Hardware Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 New Concepts for Task-based Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5.2.1 Multiple Hardware Tasks in one Reconfigurable Module . . . . 132 5.2.2 Multi-Level Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.2.3 Resource Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.3 Datapath Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.1 Task Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.2 Resource Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.3 Resource Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.4 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 5.3.5 Constraints for Scheduling and Resource Binding . . . . . . . . 151 5.4 Reconfiguration Optimized Datapath Implementation . . . . . . . . . . 153 5.4.1 Effects of Scheduling and Binding on Reconfiguration Costs . 153 5.4.2 Strategies for Resource Type Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 5.4.3 Strategies for Resource Instance Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 5.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.1 Summary of Binding Methods and Tool Setup . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.2 Cost Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.5.3 Implementation Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 5.5.4 Benchmark Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5.5.5 Benchmark Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5.5.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 5.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6 Summary and Outlook 185 Bibliography 189 A Simulated Annealing 20

Dynamic reconfiguration technologies based on FPGA in software defined radio system

Partial Reconfiguration (PR) is a method for Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) designs which allows multiple applications to time-share a portion of an FPGA while the rest of the device continues to operate unaffected. Using this strategy, the physical layer processing architecture in Software Defined Radio (SDR) systems can benefit from reduced complexity and increased design flexibility, as different waveform applications can be grouped into one part of a single FPGA. Waveform switching often means not only changing functionality, but also changing the FPGA clock frequency. However, that is beyond the current functionality of PR processes as the clock components (such as Digital Clock Managers (DCMs)) are excluded from the process of partial reconfiguration. In this paper, we present a novel architecture that combines another reconfigurable technology, Dynamic Reconfigurable Port (DRP), with PR based on a single FPGA in order to dynamically change both functionality and also the clock frequency. The architecture is demonstrated to reduce hardware utilization significantly compared with standard, static FPGA design

Time-Shared Execution of Realtime Computer Vision Pipelines by Dynamic Partial Reconfiguration

This paper presents an FPGA runtime framework that demonstrates the feasibility of using dynamic partial reconfiguration (DPR) for time-sharing an FPGA by multiple realtime computer vision pipelines. The presented time-sharing runtime framework manages an FPGA fabric that can be round-robin time-shared by different pipelines at the time scale of individual frames. In this new use-case, the challenge is to achieve useful performance despite high reconfiguration time. The paper describes the basic runtime support as well as four optimizations necessary to achieve realtime performance given the limitations of DPR on today's FPGAs. The paper provides a characterization of a working runtime framework prototype on a Xilinx ZC706 development board. The paper also reports the performance of realtime computer vision pipelines when time-shared

Smart technologies for effective reconfiguration: the FASTER approach

Current and future computing systems increasingly require that their functionality stays flexible after the system is operational, in order to cope with changing user requirements and improvements in system features, i.e. changing protocols and data-coding standards, evolving demands for support of different user applications, and newly emerging applications in communication, computing and consumer electronics. Therefore, extending the functionality and the lifetime of products requires the addition of new functionality to track and satisfy the customers needs and market and technology trends. Many contemporary products along with the software part incorporate hardware accelerators for reasons of performance and power efficiency. While adaptivity of software is straightforward, adaptation of the hardware to changing requirements constitutes a challenging problem requiring delicate solutions. The FASTER (Facilitating Analysis and Synthesis Technologies for Effective Reconfiguration) project aims at introducing a complete methodology to allow designers to easily implement a system specification on a platform which includes a general purpose processor combined with multiple accelerators running on an FPGA, taking as input a high-level description and fully exploiting, both at design time and at run time, the capabilities of partial dynamic reconfiguration. The goal is that for selected application domains, the FASTER toolchain will be able to reduce the design and verification time of complex reconfigurable systems providing additional novel verification features that are not available in existing tool flows

Exploiting partial reconfiguration through PCIe for a microphone array network emulator

The current Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS) technology enables the deployment of relatively low-cost wireless sensor networks composed of MEMS microphone arrays for accurate sound source localization. However, the evaluation and the selection of the most accurate and power-efficient network’s topology are not trivial when considering dynamic MEMS microphone arrays. Although software simulators are usually considered, they consist of high-computational intensive tasks, which require hours to days to be completed. In this paper, we present an FPGA-based platform to emulate a network of microphone arrays. Our platform provides a controlled simulated acoustic environment, able to evaluate the impact of different network configurations such as the number of microphones per array, the network’s topology, or the used detection method. Data fusion techniques, combining the data collected by each node, are used in this platform. The platform is designed to exploit the FPGA’s partial reconfiguration feature to increase the flexibility of the network emulator as well as to increase performance thanks to the use of the PCI-express high-bandwidth interface. On the one hand, the network emulator presents a higher flexibility by partially reconfiguring the nodes’ architecture in runtime. On the other hand, a set of strategies and heuristics to properly use partial reconfiguration allows the acceleration of the emulation by exploiting the execution parallelism. Several experiments are presented to demonstrate some of the capabilities of our platform and the benefits of using partial reconfiguration