ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Digital Library logoTake a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.
Practical exhaustive optimization phase order exploration and evaluation
Full text PdfPdf (935 KB)
Source
ACM Transactions on Architecture and Code Optimization (TACO) archive
Volume 6 ,  Issue 1  (March 2009) table of contents
Article No.: 1  
Year of Publication: 2009
ISSN:1544-3566
Authors
Prasad A. Kulkarni  University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas
David B. Whalley  Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
Gary S. Tyson  Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
Jack W. Davidson  University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 8,   Downloads (12 Months): 191,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1509864.1509865
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Choosing the most appropriate optimization phase ordering has been a long-standing problem in compiler optimizations. Exhaustive evaluation of all possible orderings of optimization phases for each function is generally dismissed as infeasible for production-quality compilers targeting accepted benchmarks. In this article, we show that it is possible to exhaustively evaluate the optimization phase order space for each function in a reasonable amount of time for most of the functions in our benchmark suite. To achieve this goal, we used various techniques to significantly prune the optimization phase order search space so that it can be inexpensively enumerated in most cases and reduce the number of program simulations required to evaluate program performance for each distinct phase ordering. The techniques described are applicable to other compilers in which it is desirable to find the best phase ordering for most functions in a reasonable amount of time. We also describe some interesting properties of the optimization phase order space, which will prove useful for further studies of related problems in compilers.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
2
 
3
4
 
5
Bodin, F., Kisuki, T., Knijnenburg, P., O'Boyle, M., and Rohou, E. 1998. Iterative compilation in a non-linear optimisation space. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Profile and Feedback Directed Compilation.
6
7
8
9
 
10
Davidson, J. W. and Whalley, D. B. 1991. A design environment for addressing architecture and compiler interactions. Microproces. Microsyst. 15, 9, 459--472.
 
11
Engblom, J. 2007. Using simulation tools for embedded systems software development. http://www.embedded.com/columns/technicalinsights/199501500?_requestid=111267.
 
12
 
13
Hewlett-Packard. 2000. Parallel programming guide for hp-ux systems. http://docs.hp.com/en/B3909-90003/B3909-90003.pdf (page 74).
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
Knijnenburg, P., Kisuki, T., Gallivan, K., and O'Boyle, M. 2000. The effect of cache models on iterative compilation for combined tiling and unrolling. In Proceedings of 3rd ACM Workshop on Feedback-Directed and Dynamic Optimization. ACM, New York, 31--40.
18
 
19
20
 
21
22
23
 
24
Peterson, W. and Brown, D. 1961. Cyclic codes for error detection. In Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers. 49, 228--235.
 
25
Redhat. 2004. Gnupro 04r1 tools for embedded systems development. http://www.redhat.com/f/pdf/GNUPro-04r1-Embedded-AnnouncementLetter.pdf.
26
 
27
28
 
29
Virtutech. 2008. Virtualized software development white paper. http://www.virtutech.com/files/whitepapers/wp_simics.pdf.
30
 
31
Weisstein, E. W. 2006. Correlation coefficient. from MathWorld—A Wolfram Web Resource. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CorrelationCoefficient.html.
32
33
34
 
35

Collaborative Colleagues:
Prasad A. Kulkarni: colleagues
David B. Whalley: colleagues
Gary S. Tyson: colleagues
Jack W. Davidson: colleagues