How to cite this paper
The XML Chip at 6 Years
International Symposium on Processing XML Efficiently: Overcoming Limits on Space,
Time, or Bandwidth
August 10, 2009
The XML chip is purpose-built silicon for high performance XML processing. It has
to reduce server costs, to reduce power consumption, and to reduce latency. The paper
performance of the XML chip (hybrid specialized hardware and software) with optimized
XML software for
a number of operations. The benefits of the XML chip increase as CPUs get faster,
especially with the
introduction of multi-core technology. There are challenges, notably the cost of copying
data to and
from the co-processor, but the challenges can be overcome. Results show that the use
of an XML
co-processor can reduce CPU cycles per byte of XML processed by amounts ranging from
a factor of 3 to
a factor of 50 depending on the workload, while power consumption can be reduced by
a factor of 7.
The purpose of the XML chip is not so much to make XML processing efficient as it
is to make server
usage more efficient and cost-effective. Bandwidth can always be increased by multiplying
of servers but it may not be cost effective to do so. Latency reducation, on the other
hand, is another
prime objective for the XML chip since latency is not improved either by multiplying
cores or multiplying
servers. From the point of view of server efficiency XML is interesting to accelerate
because it is the
closest thing there is to a ubiquitious computing workload. XML is the de facto choice
for virtually all
communication between applications including web traffic (HTML, XHTML, and POX (plain
old XML)), inter-
and intra-enterprise software (Web Services, REST and SOAP styles and POX, transaction
financial, health records, government services), and identity management. Jon Bosak
of Sun once famously
said “XML exists to give Java something to do.” Java and .NET as well as a plethora
of popular scripting
languages all prominently feature XML APIs and the vast enterprise applications are
constructed with XML
as the external – and sometimes internal – interface.
Is there economic benefit to a special-purpose chip for XML processing?
Assertion: Significant acceleration/offload of XML processing would improve the efficiency and
value proposition of
business-grade standard servers.
Metrics on the percentage of time spent processing XML on servers are,
frankly, not fiable. However, our studies of major enterprise software applications
has demonstrated a
clear potential benefit to XML acceleration for the important class of servers dedicated
to this task.
There is an experimentally-demonstrable argument that XML acceleration will enable
important classes of
applications that clearly consume an unacceptable number of CPU cycles. These include:
security, federated identity management, and message transformation for inter-application
These XML-based technologies are key to addressing deep problems in security and identity
and will further
an open, cloud-based flexible computing model. The value of enabling ultra-low cost
XML processing cannot
be fully appreciated only by looking at the computing environment that exists where
ulta-low cost XML
processing capabilities do not exist.
The specific value-related benefits that can be realized from XML acceleration include:
Less CPU power needed as processing is offloaded onto a more effective special-purpose
processing unit. Lower unit cost.
Lower power consumption as the XML processing unit is more energy-efficient on XML
workloads. Lower operating costs.
Higher core utilization. Much of the hard work of parallelizing
applications to take advantage of multicore applications has been done in the XML
in the controller and software interface layer between the application software
Reduction in the number of servers needed for peak loads.
Simplifies implementation and maintenance and management through ability
to meet peak loads, reduction in number of servers, elimination of bottlenecks,
programming effort to parallelize applications. Lowers failure rate and cost overruns of major
Isn't XML acceleration in hardware an unproven approach?
Assertion: LSI’s Tarari group has successfully delivered XML acceleration co-processors for
over six years. These
products have been used in high-performance, specialized XML processing appliances.
This technology is not a flash-in-the-pan; it has been proven by demanding customers
over six years, processing billions of XML messages. It is a remarkable success story
hardware-based acceleration, albeit, not generally well-known due to its initial
targeting to the
niche market of specialized, network-oriented, XML processing appliances. The work
on XML acceleration
actually goes back 4 years earlier, originating in a company acquired by Intel. Thus
a total of ten
years of R&D has been invested in this technology leading to successful commercialization.
The Tarari XML processor was used in web services gateways, application-oriented
and security appliances. Tarari was bought by LSI Corporation in October of 2007.
LSI continues to sell
an XML processor and to develop the technology. In May of 2009 HP announced an appliance
integrating the LSI Tarari XML chip and associated software with SAP’s integration
NetWeaver PI. This product is first use of the XML chip directly integrated with
a major enterprise
application software package, as opposed to prior experience with special-purpose
appliances and network devices. This development may be an important step in the
mainstreaming of XML
Isn't an XML chip destined to quick obsolesence due to frequency scaling (Moore's
Law) and parallelization
Assertion: The XML chip has increased in value with improvements in CPUs. The value proposition
has greatly improved
with the introduction of multicore.
Moore's Law: Debatable, of course, but the scientists and engineers
in the chip making business seem to mainly agree that we've hit the limitations of
physics in process
technology. Which is why frequency is now increasing very slowly (or even decreasing)and
is now focused on parallelization through multiple cores.
Multicore: Again, plenty of room for disagreement, but a critical
mass of scientists and engineers caution that multiplying cores is not the new equivalent
Law because parallelization is difficult - and also, often, labor intensive as many
tasks must be redesigned by algorithmists and reprogrammed by engineers.
While bearing the above viewpoints in mind, which strengthens the case for workload-specific
solutions, it is also our experience that the XML chip benefits from whatever improvement
can still be
eked out from the remaining life in Moore’s Law; as frequency has scaled the relative
value of the
accelerator increases. This is because the chief bottleneck in use of the accelerator
is the ability to
feed the beast – that is, to get enough data fast enough from the network interface
to the XML
co-processor. Same is true for multicore. Multicore helps the accelerator and the
XML chip also helps
multicore because much of the hard work of parallelizing applications to take advantage
applications has been done in the XML chip in the controller and software interface
layer between the
application software and hardware.
Intel, among many other chip manufacturers, promotes the use of workload-specific
"cores" or accelerators
as a complementary part of its multicore strategy. The authors of this paper have
joined with Intel the
last couple of years at IDF (Intel Developer Forum), showing the integration of the
XML accelerator with
Intel multicore platforms. The figure below is based on the Intel view of the respective
monocore, multicore, and multicore with additional, workload-specific cores such as
an XML accelerator.
Multicore + the accelerator is needed to get to the upper right quadrant of efficiency
The successes with acceleration coprocessors have been few and far between. Graphics,
cryptography, RAID, TOE – against many failures. Why will the XML chip be one of those
Assertion: The success of the XML chip may be said
to be unexpected as it is a symbolic-computing device and not a number cruncher,
the primary domain
where acceleration has been successful. Unique factors have contributed to make this
technology to succeed at this time.
First, a ubiquitious symbolic computation data format was a pre-condition, not just
success in the
technology, but just for justification for enough R&D dollars to create the possibility
of an XML
chip. The success of XML might have run counter to expectations as well, but perhaps
may have become
inevitable once the a worldwide information infrastructure became a reality.
Second, the evolution of FPGA technology that has taken place was another game-changer
which the success of the XML chip would have been impossible. The choice of reconfigurable
permitted the designers to pursue an evolutionary development path of approximately
two major design
iterations per year and countless minor revisions over the lifetime of the product.
This has been very
advantageous in an area where there was little hard science and engineering history
to guide us. It
also permitted us to closely track the rapid evolution of microprocessor architecture
instead of following one to two years in the wake of new general purpose processor
FPGA has also been the most cost-effective choice at the relatively low production
characteristic of the early years of the introduction of a new infrastructure technology.
Author Lemoine was a student of the great pioneer of reconfigurable logic, Jean Vuillemin,
who demonstrated in the late 1980 and early 1990s that the programmable active memory
could be used
to implement any computing function and serve as universal hardware co-processor
coupled with the
XML processing, a byte-oriented symbolic computing problem, is, in the application
not an obvious choice for FPGA technology, Symbolic computing is difficult due to
the lack of known
algorithms for acceleration in this area and a readily reducible problem space where
been identified. The strategy, therefore, had to be evolutionary based on iterative
and modular design
as experience was accumulated and also as the price-performance and capacity of FPGAs
expanding potential capabilities. It became evident that the development program
would only have been
feasible with the use of reconfigurable logic; having now spanned 6 years,it has
progressively better results and a wider functional footprint.
Finally, the proof of success is shown simply in the fact that we are still here.
The XML chip technology
has shown staying power, with 10 years of R&D and a solid position in
the niche market of XML network appliances. It is already a limited success and is
ready to enter a wider
The potential for a broader success is predicated on advances which, effectively,
lower the payoff range
for the added cost the co-processor and the continued use of XML as the ubiquitious
computer-to-computer communication. Further expansion of XML use in the emerging IT
landscape will help
with new XML-intensive workloads in message-level security, identity management, inter-application
transformation and control-plane management of the cloud.
Don’t all “transformation” accelerators have the fundamental problem that the acceleration
largely neutralized by the copy-in, copy-out overhead? At least until you have cache
accelerators have access to memory as equal citizens with the CPUs.
Assertion: Getting the data to and from the board
is indeed among the major challenges; in the early years the XML chip was often a
because of it. With advances in the chip, it is rarely a major challenge today.
Copy-in, copy-out is certainly among the challenges with the current generation of
accelerators. The XML
chip is not strictly a transformation processor; many the processing problems it solves
involve a computed
result on the input and may save the copy-out step. Where a full copy-in, copy-out
sequence is required
very high acceleration values may still be obtained in most cases because of the goodness
of the output
structures produced by the accelerator. These structures would be prohibitively costly
to construct with
a software process but once they are constructed by the hardware they can be used
to greatly accelerate
subsequent processing of the XML content in software.
The key to understanding this is to understand that the XML chip produces only limited
many of the established approaches to constructing XML processing software where copy-in,
a serious problem and produces remarkable levels of acceleration for equally-valid
approaches that have
been little exploited in the past due to their inefficiency without purpose-build
XML hardware. The LSI
XML chip has an extensive API which enables easy construction of applications using
unique to performance characteristics obtainable using its special features.
An example of a well-established XML processing approach which yields only limited
acceleration with the XML chip is use of the Document Object Model (DOM). The DOM
is memory intensive,
constructing a tree-structure model of the XML document prior to navigating the document
to extract the
desired data. The cost of construction of the tree may be amortized in a long-lived
document which is
scanned repeatedly and deeply but is generally a poor performer in typical transactional
The vast majority of XML applications are implemented using the DOM due to the number
of robust free
tools. In some cases an underlying DOM representation can be replaced by our Random
Access XML (RAX) API.
This is the strategy we employed in creating our own version of an XSLT engine, RAX-XSLT.
We would, however, like very much to accelerate "inefficient" software processes to
with the XML chip to be applied to legacy applications. There are developments in
that may make this feasible. Cache-coherent accelerator-friendly architectures may
be the next wave for
special purpose co-processors. While the integration between the XML accelerator
and CPU has been designed successfully
around the memory-copy problem, eliminating this problem will certainly enable new
Prove to me you can’t do accelerated XML with a Von Neumann core.
Assertion: It is the guaranteed structure of that
enables a non-Von Neumann micro-parallelism which gets much more work done on a single
question really is can a special-purpose device created by a handful of people from
efficient design possible beat a general computing device at the same task when thousands
labored to make that device as fast as possible? The success of the XML chip seems
to lie in
XML itself, which challenges the Von Neumann architecture yet has proven highly tractable
Nonetheless, there are many things we cannot do at the scale of effort put into the
XML chip and for this
reason our strategy has always been to accelerate the software running on the
host processor. Simply in terms of logic components, We can’t implement that much
XML processing on our
chip. The XML chip, asan XML software accelerator, is expressly designed to improve
the performance of
software run on a Von Neumann core. While we continue to carve more and more of the
problem into hardware the problem remains too general and hence too large that we
would anticipate that a
chip will ever fully offload XML processing. The intelligence of our design rests
in the way we have
integrated special-purpose XML hardware with the XML software stack to fully leverage
the value of the
capability of the hardware again and again in software processes.
The strongest evidence the hybrid of special-purpose hardware with a
non-Von Neumann architecture and software running on a Von Neumann architecture is
in the comparative
results obtained with highly optimized XML software and also with our own software
which emulates the
exact functionality of the hardware. XML has been use for over a decade and there
have been many attempts
to create high-performance XML software components. We test our hardware against these
software which emulates the hardware tends to perform in the higher range, comparable
to the best of
The following table compares the performance of hardware (hybrid specialized hardware
and software) versus
optimized XML software for a number of operations. The measurement is normalized into
host cycles per byte
of processed XML. These are numbers with the current LSI product.
Hardware/Software Compared to Software-Only (Von Neumann architecture) Performance
Parser Attack Checks
Parallel to parsing; detects buffer overflow and resource exhaustion attacks against
Parser-based well-formed check
Message-based anomaly detection
Detects messages which deviate from statistical norm; adaptive; stronger than schema
Token-based parsing with sequential and random-access to all XML objects
SAX 80 DOM 400
Routing decisions based on large XPath sets
XML Schema Validation
XML-based Authentication based on XML and WS Security specifications
If I start a project to use an XML chip won’t I find that after 3 years of planning
that “Moore’s cores blew up our tailpipe again”?
Assertion: You sort of have already asked this.
The XML chip has been a bold experiment, not, until today, for the faint of heart.
But it is starting
to look like a safe choice.
The XML chip, as an XML software accelerator, increases in acceleration value as CPUs
get faster. Since
we began commercialization of the technology CPU frequencies have doubled and the
number of cores has
quadrupled while the acceleration value of the co-processor has steadily increased
with each advance in
CPU architecture and performance. We're still here.