Compilation Method of Reconfigurable Cryptographic Processors

  • Leibo LiuEmail author
  • Bo Wang
  • Shaojun Wei


As an implementation of reconfigurable computing processors in specific fields, a reconfigurable cryptographic processor inherits the basic compilation framework of reconfigurable computing processors: The algorithm is described in high-level programming languages; the hardware and software partition is made through the static or dynamic analysis; then, the hardware part is transformed into the universal intermediate representation through the front-end compilation tools, which is then optimized through the middle-end compilation tools; finally, the mapping is implemented through back-end compilation tools including the synthesis tool, placement and routing tool, and the configuration information of the reconfigurable computing structure is generated. This chapter will be based on this framework and consider the particularity of the compilation method of reconfigurable cryptographic processors. As a cipher algorithm has many obvious code features such as the fixed-boundary loop, loop-carried data dependency, simple control flow, and quite different data granularity, the compilation method of the compiler of a reconfigurable cryptographic processor needs to be optimized based on these features. This chapter will start with general reconfigurable computing processors and introduce their universal compilation technologies and methods, including the main steps throughout compilation process. Then, this chapter will discuss the compilation methods of reconfigurable cryptographic processors, focusing on the steps which are very important for cipher application, such as code transformation and optimization, division and mapping of intermediate representations. Finally, this chapter will give examples about compilation and implementation of different cipher algorithms.


  1. 1.
    Cardoso JMP, Diniz PC et al (2010) Compiling for reconfigurable computing: a survey. ACM Comput Surv 42(4):1–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li Z, Liu L (2017) Aggressive pipelining of irregular applications on reconfigurable hardware. In: International symposium on computer architecture CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mahlke SA, Lin DC, Chen WY et al (1993) Effective compiler support for predicated execution using the hyperblock. In: International symposium on microarchitecture, pp 45–54Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Girkar M, Polychronopoulos CD (1992) Automatic extraction of functional parallelism from ordinary programs. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 3(2):166–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Galloway D (1995) The transmogrifier C hardware description language and compiler for FPGAs. In: IEEE symposium on FPGAs for custom computing machines, p 136Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Agarwal L, Wazlowski M, Ghosh S (1994) An asynchronous approach to efficient execution of programs on adaptive architectures utilizing FPGAs. In: IEEE workshop on FPGAs for custom computing machines. IEEE, pp 101–110Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Weinhaudt M, Luk W (2002) Memory access optimisation for reconfigurable systems. IEE Proc Comput Digit Tech 148(3):105–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Babb J, Rinard M, Moritz CA et al (1999) Parallelizing applications into silicon. In: IEEE symposium on field-programmable custom computing machines, pp 70–80Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bondalapati K, Prasanna VK (1999) Dynamic precision management for loop computations on reconfigurable architectures. In: IEEE symposium on field-programmable custom computing machines, pp 249–258Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gokhale M, Stone JM, Arnold JG et al (2000) Stream-oriented FPGA computing in the streams-C high level language. In: IEEE symposium on field-programmable custom computing machines, pp 49–56Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yin C, Yin S, Liu L et al (2009) Compiler framework for reconfigurable computing system. In: International conference on communications, circuits and systems, pp 991–995Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smith AL (2009) Explicit data graph compilation. The University of Texas at Austin doctoral dissertation, AustinGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Budiu M, Goldstein SC (1999) Fast compilation for pipelined reconfigurable fabrics. In: ACM/SIGDA international symposium on field programmable gate arrays, pp 195–205Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mei B, Vernalde S, Verkest D et al (2003) ADRES: an architecture with tightly coupled VLIW processor and coarse-grained reconfigurable matrix. In: International conference on field-programmable logic and applications, pp 61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baumgarte V, Ehlers G, May F et al (2003) PACT XPP-a self-reconfigurable data processing architecture. J Supercomput 26(2):167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Benson J, Cofell R, Frericks C et al (2012) Design, integration and implementation of the DySER hardware accelerator into OpenSPARC. In: IEEE international symposium on high-performance computer architecture, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lattner C, Adve VS (2004) LLVM: a compilation framework for lifelong program analysis and transformation. In: International symposium on code generation and optimization, pp 75–86Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ye ZA, Shenoy N, Baneijee P (2000) A C compiler for a processor with a reconfigurable functional unit. In: ACM/SIGDA international symposium on field programmable gate arrays, pp 95–100Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Callahan TJ, Hauser JR, Wawrzynek J (2000) The Garp architecture and C compiler. Computer 33(4):62–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gokhale M, Gomersall D (1997) High level compilation for fine grained FPGAs. In: IEEE symposium on field-programmable custom computing machines, pp 165–173Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Micheli GD (1994) Synthesis and optimization of digital circuits. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Budiu M, Sakr M, Walker K et al (2000) Bitvalue inference: detecting and exploiting narrow bitwidth computations. In: International Euro-Par conference on parallel processing, pp 969–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Muchnick SS (1997) Advanced compiler design and implementation. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dongarra JJ, Hinds AR (2010) Unrolling loops in fortran. Softw Pract Exp 9(3):219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hartenstein RW, Kress R (1995) A datapath synthesis system for the reconfigurable datapath architecture. In: Asia and South Pacific design automation conference, pp 479–484Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lam MS (1988) Software pipelining: an effective scheduling technique for VLIW machines. ACM Sigplan Not 23(7):318–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hamzeh M, Shrivastava A, Vrudhula S (2012) EPIMap: using epimorphism to map applications on CGRAs. In: Design automation conference, pp 1280–1287Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Park H, Fan K, Mahlke S et al (2008) Edge-centric modulo scheduling for coarse-grained reconfigurable architectures. In: International conference on parallel architectures and compilation techniques, pp 166–176Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Park H, Fan K, Kudlur M et al (2006) Modulo graph embedding: mapping applications onto coarse-grained reconfigurable architectures. In: International conference on compilers, architecture and synthesis for embedded systems, pp 136–146Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hamzeh M, Shrivastava A, Vrudhula S (2013) REGIMap: register-aware application mapping on coarse-grained reconfigurable architectures. In: Design automation conference, p 18Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bastoul C (2004) Code generation in the polyhedral model is easier than you think. In: International conference on parallel architecture and compilation techniques, pp 7–16Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bondhugula U, Hartono A, Ramanujam J et al (2008) A practical automatic polyhedral parallelizer and locality optimizer. ACM SIGPLAN Not 43(6):101–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cohen A, Sigler M, Girbal S et al (2005) Facilitating the search for compositions of program transformations. In: International conference on supercomputing, pp 151–160Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hannig F, Dutta H, Teich J (2004) Mapping of regular nested loop programs to coarse-grained reconfigurable arrays-constraints and methodology. In: International parallel and distributed processing symposium, p 148Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Liu D, Yin S, Liu L et al (2013) Polyhedral model based mapping optimization of loop nests for CGRAs. In: Design automation conference, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liu D, Yin S, Peng Y et al (2015) Optimizing spatial mapping of nested loop for coarse-grained reconfigurable architectures. IEEE Trans Very Large Scale Integr Syst 23(11):2581–2594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Peterson JB, O’Connor RB, Athanas PM (1996) Scheduling and partitioning ANSI-C programs onto multi-FPGA CCM architectures. In: IEEE symposium on FPGAs for custom computing machines, pp 178–187Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kum K, Kang J, Sung W (2000) Autoscaler for C: an optimizing floating-point to integer C program converter for fixed-point digital signal processors. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst II: Analog Digit Signal Process 47(9):840–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ong SW, Kerkiz N, Srijanto B et al (2001) Automatic mapping of multiple applications to multiple adaptive computing systems. In: IEEE symposium on field-programmable custom computing machines, pp 10–20Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. and Science Press, Beijing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of MicroelectronicsTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations