Transactional memory (TM) has been the focus of numerous studies, and it is supported in processors such as the IBM Blue Gene/Q and Intel Haswell. Many studies have used the STAMP benchmark suite to evaluate their designs. However, the speedups obtained for the STAMP benchmarks on all TM systems we know of are quite limited; for example, with 64 threads on the IBM Blue Gene/Q, we observe a median speedup of 1.4X using the Blue Gene/Q hardware transactional memory (HTM), and a median speedup of 4.1X using a software transactional memory (STM).

What limits the performance of these benchmarks on TMs? In this paper, we argue that the problem lies with the programming model and data structures used to write them. To make this point, we articulate two principles that we believe must be embodied in any scalable program and argue that STAMP programs violate both of them. By modifying the STAMP programs to satisfy both principles, we produce a new set of programs that we call the Stampede suite. Its median speedup on the Blue Gene/Q is 8.0X when using an STM. The two principles also permit us to simplify the TM design. Using this new STM with the Stampede benchmarks, we obtain a median speedup of 17.7X with 64 threads on the Blue Gene/Q and 13.2X with 32 threads on an Intel Westmere system.

These results suggest that HTM and STM designs will benefit if more attention is paid to the division of labor between application programs, systems software, and hardware.