Advertisement

Eine Umgebung zur Evaluierung paralleler Logiksimulationsverfahren

  • Philipp Lanchès
  • U. G. Baitinger
Conference paper
Part of the Informatik aktuell book series (INFORMAT)

Kurzfassung

In diesem Artikel wird das System PARASOL vorgestellt. Es dient zur Untersuchung verteilter Algorithmen für die Logiksimulation, Das System umfaßt dazu eine Reihe von parallelen Simulatoren sowie von Werkzeugen, die zur effizienten Parallelisierung der Simulation benötigt werden. Das System verfügt über eine Monitoring-Komponentey die es erlaubt, das Laufzeitverhalten der Algorithmen zu analysieren. Das System ist an eine LCA-Entwurfsumgebung angeschlossen und eignet sich für praktische Simulationsanwendungen.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. [Bai92]
    Mary L. Bailey. How Circuit Size Affects Parallelism. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design, 11(2):208–215, Feb. 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [BBK89]
    Franc Brglez, David Bryan, und Krzysztof Kozminski. Combinational Profiles of Sequential Benchmark Circuits. In Proc. 22nd int. Symposium on Ciruicts and System, S. 1929–1934. IEEE, Mai 1989.Google Scholar
  3. [Bie91]
    Bernd Bieker. Benutzertransparentes Monitoring von Multitransputersystemen. Studienarbeit IAB52, Universität-GH-Paderborn, Feb. 1991.Google Scholar
  4. [Bri90]
    Jack Vedder Briner, Jr. Parallel, Mixed-Level Simulation of Digital Circuits Using Virtual Time. PhD thesis, Duke University, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. [Bry85]
    David Bryan. The ISCAS’85 benchmark circuits and netlist format. Technischer Bericht, Microelectronics Center of North Carolina (MCNC), P.O. Box 12889, 3021 Cornwallis Rd, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 1985.Google Scholar
  6. [CM79]
    K.M. Chandy und J. Misra. Distributed Simulation: A Case Study in Design and Verification of Distributed Programs. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design, SE.5(5):440–452, Sept. 1979.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [CM81]
    K.M. Chandy und J. Misra. Asynchronous Distributed Simulation via a Sequence of Parallel Computations. Communication of the ACM, 24(11): 198–206, Apr. 1981.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [dB89]
    Jan de Baat. Another Idle-Time Monitor for Transputer Networks. SERC-DTI Transputer Initiative, Mailshot, S. 71–78, Dez. 1989.Google Scholar
  9. [DV90]
    Giuseppe DePietro und Umberto Villano. An Environment for Transputer CPU Load Measurements. In Real-Time Systems with Transputers, Proceedings of the I3th Occam User Group Technical Meeting 18–20 Spetemher 1990York, England, S. 75–82. IOS Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. [Fuj90]
    Richard M. Fujimoto. Parallel Discrete Event Simulation. Communication of the ACM, 33(10):31–53, Okt. 1990.Google Scholar
  11. [IYY84]
    Nagisa Ishiura, Hiroto Yasuura und Shuzo Yajima. Time First Evaluation Algorithm for High-Speed Logic Simulation. In Proc. international Conference on Computer Aided Design, S. 197–199. IEEE, 1984.Google Scholar
  12. [Jef85]
    D.R. Jefferson. Virtual Time. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 7(3):404–425, Jun. 1985.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [KA88]
    Saul A, Kravitz und Bryan D. Ackland. Static vs. dynamic partitionning of circuits for a MOS timing simulator on a message-based multiprocessor. In Brian Unger und David Jefferson (Hrsg.), Proc. of the SCS Multiconference on Distributed Simulation, Vol. 19 of Simulation Series, S. 136–140, San Diego, California, Jul. 1988. SCS International.Google Scholar
  14. [LB90]
    E.D. Lin, Y.-B. Lazowska und M.L. Bailey. Comparing Synchronization Protocols for Parallel Logic-Level Simulation. In Proc. of the 1990 International Conference on Parallel Processing, S. 3/223–3/227, 1990.Google Scholar
  15. [LB92]
    Ph. Lanchès und U. G. Baitinger. A Parallel Evaluation Environment for Distributed Logic Simulation. In John Stephenson, editor. Modelling and Simulation 1992, Proc. of the 1992 European Simulation Multiconference, S. 465–469, San Diego, CA, Jun. 1992. SCS International.Google Scholar
  16. [LL90]
    Yi-Bing Lin und Edward D. Lazowska. Exploiting Lookahead in Parallel Simulation. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 1(4):457–469, Okt. 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [MT92]
    Y. Matsumoto und K. Taki. Parallel Logic Simulation on a Distributed Memory Machine. In Proc. European Conference on Design Automation, S. 76–80, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [PT78]
    Nathan D. Philips und J. G. Tellier. Efficient Event Manipulation the Key to Large Scale Simulation. In Proc. Semiconductor Test Conference, S. 266–273. IEEE, Okt. 1978.Google Scholar
  19. [SG89]
    L. Soule und A. Gupta. Characterization of Parallelism and Deadlocks in a Distributed Digital Logic Simulation. In Proc. of the 26th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference, S. 81–86, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. [SUM87]
    Steven P. Smith, Bill Underwood und M. R. Mercer. An Analysis of Several Approaches to Circuit Partitionning for Parallel Logic Simulation. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Design, VLSI in Computers, S. 664–667, Los Angeles, California, 1987. CS Press.Google Scholar
  21. [WFCS86]
    K.F. Wong, M.A. Franklin, R.D Chamberlain und B.L. Sing. Statistics on Logic Simulation. In Proc. of the 23rd Design Automation Conference, S. 13–19, 1986.Google Scholar
  22. [WLB89]
    David B. Wagner, Edward D. Lazowska und B. Bershad. Techniques for Efficient Shared — Memory Parallel Simulation. In Proceedings of the SCS Multiconference on Distributed Simulation, S. 29–37, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philipp Lanchès
    • 1
  • U. G. Baitinger
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Parallele und Verteilte Höchstleistungsrechner (IPVR), Fakultät InformatikUniversität StuttgartStuttgart 80Deutschland

Personalised recommendations