Write-back vs Write-Through caching?

Question

The benefit of write-through to main memory is that it simplifies the design of the computer system. With write-through, the main memory always has an up-to-date copy of the line. So when a read is done, main memory can always reply with the requested data.

If write-back is used, sometimes the up-to-date data is in a processor cache, and sometimes it is in main memory. If the data is in a processor cache, then that processor must stop main memory from replying to the read request, because the main memory might have a stale copy of the data. This is more complicated than write-through.

Also, write-through can simplify the cache coherency protocol because it doesn't need the Modify state. The Modify state records that the cache must write back the cache line before it invalidates or evicts the line. In write-through a cache line can always be invalidated without writing back since memory already has an up-to-date copy of the line.

One more thing - on a write-back architecture software that writes to memory-mapped I/O registers must take extra steps to make sure that writes are immediately sent out of the cache. Otherwise writes are not visible outside the core until the line is read by another processor or the line is evicted.

Hope this article can help you Differences between disk Cache Write-through and Write-back

Write-through: Write is done synchronously both to the cache and to the backing store.

Write-back (or Write-behind): Writing is done only to the cache. A modified cache block is written back to the store, just before it is replaced.

Write-through: When data is updated, it is written to both the cache and the back-end storage. This mode is easy for operation but is slow in data writing because data has to be written to both the cache and the storage.

Write-back: When data is updated, it is written only to the cache. The modified data is written to the back-end storage only when data is removed from the cache. This mode has fast data write speed but data will be lost if a power failure occurs before the updated data is written to the storage.

Let's look at this with the help of an example. Suppose we have a direct mapped cache and the write back policy is used. So we have a valid bit, a dirty bit, a tag and a data field in a cache line. Suppose we have an operation : write A ( where A is mapped to the first line of the cache).

What happens is that the data(A) from the processor gets written to the first line of the cache. The valid bit and tag bits are set. The dirty bit is set to 1.

Dirty bit simply indicates was the cache line ever written since it was last brought into the cache!

Now suppose another operation is performed : read E(where E is also mapped to the first cache line)

Since we have direct mapped cache, the first line can simply be replaced by the E block which will be brought from memory. But since the block last written into the line (block A) is not yet written into the memory(indicated by the dirty bit), so the cache controller will first issue a write back to the memory to transfer the block A to memory, then it will replace the line with block E by issuing a read operation to the memory. dirty bit is now set to 0.

So write back policy doesnot guarantee that the block will be the same in memory and its associated cache line. However whenever the line is about to be replaced, a write back is performed at first.

A write through policy is just the opposite. According to this, the memory will always have a up-to-date data. That is, if the cache block is written, the memory will also be written accordingly. (no use of dirty bits)

Write-back and write-through describe policies when a write hit occurs, that is when the cache has the requested information. In these examples, we assume a single processor is writing to main memory with a cache.

Write-through: The information is written to the cache and memory, and the write finishes when both have finished. This has the advantage of being simpler to implement, and the main memory is always consistent (in sync) with the cache (for the uniprocessor case - if some other device modifies main memory, then this policy is not enough), and a read miss never results in writes to main memory. The obvious disadvantage is that every write hit has to do two writes, one of which accesses slower main memory.

Write-back: The information is written to a block in the cache. The modified cache block is only written to memory when it is replaced (in effect, a lazy write). A special bit for each cache block, the dirty bit, marks whether or not the cache block has been modified while in the cache. If the dirty bit is not set, the cache block is "clean" and a write miss does not have to write the block to memory.

The advantage is that writes can occur at the speed of the cache, and if writing within the same block only one write to main memory is needed (when the previous block is being replaced). The disadvantages are that this protocol is harder to implement, main memory can be not consistent (not in sync) with the cache, and reads that result in replacement may cause writes of dirty blocks to main memory.

The policies for a write miss are detailed in my first link.

These protocols don't take care of the cases with multiple processors and multiple caches, as is common in modern processors. For this, more complicated cache coherence mechanisms are required. Write-through caches have simpler protocols since a write to the cache is immediately reflected in memory.

Good resources:

• http://web.cs.iastate.edu/~prabhu/Tutorial/CACHE/interac.html (what my post is largely based on)
• http://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs3410/2013sp/lecture/18-caches3-w.pdf

Write-Back is a more complex one and requires a complicated Cache Coherence Protocol(MOESI) but it is worth it as it makes the system fast and efficient.

The only benefit of Write-Through is that it makes the implementation extremely simple and no complicated cache coherency protocol is required.