Abstract
It is well known that a program execution exhibits time-varying behavior, i.e., a program typically goes through a number of phases during its execution with each phase exhibiting relatively homogeneous behavior within a phase and distinct behavior across phases. In fact, several recent research studies have been exploiting this time-varying behavior for various purposes.
This paper proposes phase complexity surfaces to characterize a computer program’s phase behavior across various time scales in an intuitive manner. The phase complexity surfaces incorporate metrics that characterize phase behavior in terms of the number of phases, its predictability, the degree of variability within and across phases, and the phase behavior’s dependence on the time scale granularity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Balasubramonian, R., Albonesi, D., Buyuktosunoglu, A., Dwarkadas, S.: Memory hierarchy reconfiguration for energy and performance in general-purpose processor architectures. In: MICRO (December 2000)
Burger, D.C., Austin, T.M.: The SimpleScalar Tool Set. Computer Architecture News (1997), http://www.simplescalar.com
Chen, I.K., Coffey, J.T., Mudge, T.N.: Analysis of branch prediction via data compression. In: ASPLOS, pp. 128–137 (October 1996)
Cho, C.-B., Li, T.: Complexity-based program phase analysis and classification. In: PACT, pp. 105–113 (September 2006)
Cho, C.-B., Li, T.: Using wavelet domain workload execution characteristics to improve accuracy, scalability and robustness in program phase analysis. In: ISPASS (March 2007)
Dhodapkar, A., Smith, J.E.: Dynamic microarchitecture adaptation via co-designed virtual machines. In: International Solid State Circuits Conference (February 2002)
Dhodapkar, A., Smith, J.E.: Managing multi-configuration hardware via dynamic working set analysis. In: ISCA (May 2002)
Duesterwald, E., Cascaval, C., Dwarkadas, S.: Characterizing and predicting program behavior and its variability. In: Malyshkin, V. (ed.) PaCT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2763, Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Eeckhout, L., Sampson, J., Calder, B.: Exploiting program microarchitecture independent characteristics and phase behavior for reduced benchmark suite simulation. In: IISWC, pp. 2–12 (October 2005)
Eeckhout, L., Vandierendonck, H., De Bosschere, K.: Workload design: Selecting representative program-input pairs. In: PACT, pp. 83–94 (September 2002)
Georges, A., Buytaert, D., Eeckhout, L., De Bosschere, K.: Method-level phase behavior in Java workloads. In: OOPSLA, pp. 270–287 (October 2004)
Huang, M., Renau, J., Torrellas, J.: Positional adaptation of processors: Application to energy reduction. In: ISCA (June 2003)
Huffmire, T., Sherwood, T.: Wavelet-based phase classification. In: PACT, pp. 95–104 (September 2006)
Isci, C., Martonosi, M.: Identifying program power phase behavior using power vectors. In: WWC (September 2003)
Johnson, R.A., Wichern, D.W.: Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2002)
Lau, J., Perelman, E., Calder, B.: Selecting software phase markers with code structure analysis. In: CGO, pp. 135–146 (March 2006)
Lau, J., Perelman, E., Hamerly, G., Sherwood, T., Calder, B.: Motivation for variable length intervals and hierarchical phase behavior. In: ISPASS, pp. 135–146 (March 2005)
Lau, J., Sampson, J., Perelman, E., Hamerly, G., Calder, B.: The strong correlation between code signatures and performance. In: ISPASS (March 2005)
Lau, J., Schoenmackers, S., Calder, B.: Structures for phase classification. In: ISPASS, pp. 57–67 (March 2004)
Lau, J., Schoenmackers, S., Calder, B.: Transition phase classification and prediction. In: HPCA, pp. 278–289 (February 2005)
Nagpurkar, P., Krintz, C., Sherwood, T.: Phase-aware remote profiling. In: CGO, pp. 191–202 (March 2005)
Patil, H., Cohn, R., Charney, M., Kapoor, R., Sun, A., Karunanidhi, A.: Pinpointing representative portions of larhe Intel Itanium programs with dynamic instrumentation. In: MICRO, pp. 81–93 (December 2004)
Perelman, E., Hamerly, G., Calder, B.: Picking statistically valid and early simulation points. In: Malyshkin, V. (ed.) PaCT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2763, pp. 244–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Shen, X., Zhong, Y., Ding, C.: Locality phase prediction. In: ASPLOS (October 2004)
Sherwood, T., Perelman, E., Calder, B.: Basic block distribution analysis to find periodic behavior and simulation points in applications. In: Malyshkin, V. (ed.) PaCT 2001. LNCS, vol. 2127, pp. 3–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Sherwood, T., Perelman, E., Hamerly, G., Calder, B.: Automatically characterizing large scale program behavior. In: ASPLOS, pp. 45–57 (October 2002)
Sherwood, T., Sair, S., Calder, B.: Phase tracking and prediction. In: ISCA, pp. 336–347 (June 2003)
Vandeputte, F., Eeckhout, L., De Bosschere, K.: A detailed study on phase predictors. In: Cunha, J.C., Medeiros, P.D. (eds.) Euro-Par 2005. LNCS, vol. 3648, pp. 571–581. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Vandeputte, F., Eeckhout, L. (2008). Phase Complexity Surfaces: Characterizing Time-Varying Program Behavior. In: Stenström, P., Dubois, M., Katevenis, M., Gupta, R., Ungerer, T. (eds) High Performance Embedded Architectures and Compilers. HiPEAC 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4917. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77560-7_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77560-7_22
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-77559-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-77560-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)