Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are parallel workstations the right target for parallelizing compilers?

  • Parallelizing Compilers
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Languages and Compilers for Parallel Computing (LCPC 1996)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1239))

Abstract

The growing popularity of multiprocessor workstations among general users calls for a more easy-to-understand approach to parallel programming. Providing standard, sequential languages with automatic translation tools would enable a seamless transition from uniprocessors to multiprocessor workstations. In this paper we study the success and limitations of such an approach. To this end, we have retargeted the Polaris parallelizing compiler at a 4-processor Sun SPARCstation 20 and measured the performance of parallel programs. Here, we present the results from six of the Perfect Benchmark programs along with our analysis of the performance and some of the issues brought up during the experiments. Our research will help answer some of the questions that have been posed by both users and manufacturers concerning the practicality and desirable characteristics of parallel programming in a workstation environment.

This work was supported in part by U. S. Army contract #DABT63-92-C-0033. This work is not necessarily representative of the positions or policies of the U. S. Army or the Government.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. William Blume, Ramon Doallo, Rudolf Eigenmann, John Grout, Jay Hoeflinger, Thomas Lawrence, Jaejin Lee, David Padua, Yunheung Paek, Bill Pottenger, Lawrence Rauchwerger, and Peng Tu. Advanced program restructuring for high-performance computers with Polaris. IEEE Computer, December 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  2. William Blume and Rudolf Eigenmann. Performance Analysis of Parallelizing Compilers on the Perfect Benchmarks Programs. IEEE Transactions of Parallel and Distributed Systems, 3(6):643–656, November 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. William Blume and Rudolf Eigenmann. The Range Test: A Dependence Test for Symbolic, Non-linear Expressions. Proceedings of Supercomputing '94, Washington D.C., pages 528–537, November 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  4. William Blume and Rudolf Eigenmann. Symbolic Range Propagation. Proceedings of the 9th International Parallel Processing Symposium, pages 357–363, April 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Utpal Banerjee, Rudolf Eigenmann, Alexandru Nicolau, and David Padua. Automatic Program Parallelization. Proceedings of the IEEE, 81(2):211–243, February 1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Keith A. Faigin, Jay P. Hoeflinger, David A. Padua, Paul M. Petersen, and Stephen A. Weatherford. The Polaris Internal Representation. International Journal of Parallel Programming, 22(5):553–586, October 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Vinod Grover and Michael Lai. Directives for SC4.0 Fortran and Fortran MP. Technical report, Sun Microsystems, Inc., 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. W. Hall, J. M. Anderson, S. P. Amarasinghe, B. R. Murphy, S.-W. Liao, E. Bugnion, and M. S. Lam. Getting performance out of multiprocessors with the SUIF compiler. IEEE Computer, December 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jay Hoeflinger. Polaris developer's document. Technical report, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Center for Supercomp. R&D, 1996. http://www.csrd.uiuc.edu/polaris/polarisdeveloper/polaris-developer.html.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bill Pottenger and Rudolf Eigenmann. Idiom Recognition in the Polaris Parallelizing Compiler. Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on Supercomputing, pages 444–448, 95.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sun Microrsystems, Inc., Mountain View, CA. FORTRAN 4.0 User's Guide, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sun Microsystems, Inc. SPARCstation 20 Series with SuperSPARC and SuperSPARC-II Processors, 1996. http://www.sun.com:80/products-n-solutions/hw/wstns/jtf_ss20.html.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Peng Tu and David Padua. Automatic Array Privatization. In Utpal BanerjeeDavid GelernterAlex NicolauDavid Padua, editor, Proc. Sixth Workshop on Languages and Compilers for Parallel Computing, Portland, OR. Lecture Notes in Computer Science., volume 768, pages 500–521, August 12–14, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Purdue University, USA

    Rudolf Eigenmann, Insung Park & Michael J. Voss

Authors
  1. Rudolf Eigenmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Insung Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael J. Voss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

David Sehr Utpal Banerjee David Gelernter Alex Nicolau David Padua

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Eigenmann, R., Park, I., Voss, M.J. (1997). Are parallel workstations the right target for parallelizing compilers?. In: Sehr, D., Banerjee, U., Gelernter, D., Nicolau, A., Padua, D. (eds) Languages and Compilers for Parallel Computing. LCPC 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1239. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0017260

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0017260

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63091-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69128-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation