Multi-Source Tracker Progression Management

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In communication networks, the lack of progression management in trackers leads to resource starvation and livelock when multiple requesting devices contend for transaction resources, causing some requests to be denied acceptance and resulting in adverse conditions such as buffer over-utilization and lack of forward progression.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a system that maintains a set of progression groups, where requests are allocated to either a privileged or non-privileged group based on availability, using a dedicated tracker for privileged requests and a generic tracker for others, with counters to manage group utilization and swap privileged status when necessary.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If a single tracker is used to manage requests from multiple sources, then the system structure is simple, but resource starvation and livelock occur when multiple requesting devices contend for transaction resources

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetracker structureVSAvoidrequest acceptance
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the single tracker into multiple progression groups (first progression group, second progression group, etc.), where each group manages requests from specific sources. This segmentation prevents resource starvation and livelock by ensuring that requests from different sources are processed independently through separate progression tracks, while maintaining overall system organization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Productivity

If requests are processed without progression management, then the processing speed is high, but buffer over-utilization and lack of forward progression occur

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverequest processing speedVSAvoidforward progression
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements progression management through feedback mechanisms where the system monitors the state of requests in each progression group and adjusts processing accordingly. When requests are denied acceptance, the system provides feedback through negative acknowledgments that include progression group information, enabling requesting devices to retry with appropriate progression tracking, thus ensuring forward progression while maintaining processing speed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If a dedicated tracker is created for each source, then resource starvation is prevented, but the device complexity and management overhead increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresource allocationVSAvoidtracker management
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates multiple progression groups that can be dynamically assigned to different sources rather than creating dedicated trackers for each source. This universal approach allows the same progression management mechanism to handle requests from any number of sources flexibly, preventing resource starvation while avoiding the complexity of source-specific dedicated trackers.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS11909643B2Efficient progression management in a tracker with multiple sources
Publication Date: 2024.02.20 HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE DEV LP
  • US11909643B2 patent drawing
  • US11909643B2 patent drawing
  • US11909643B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system for facilitating efficient progression management in a multi-source tracker of a responder device is provided. During operation, the system can maintain, in a memory device of the responder device, a first tracker for all requests and a second tracker for a privileged group of requests. The system can select a first group from a set of groups as the privileged group. If a request from a requesting device cannot be accepted into the first tracker, the system can determine whether the request belongs to the first group based on a header field of the request. If the request belongs to the first group, the system can select the request for accepting into the second tracker. Subsequently, when a respective request belonging to the first group has been accepted, the system can select a second group from the set of groups as the privileged group.