Advertisement

A BMC-based formulation for the scheduling problem of hardware systems

  • Gianpiero Cabodi
  • Alex Kondratyev
  • Luciano Lavagno
  • Sergio Nocco
  • Stefano QuerEmail author
  • Yosinori Watanabe
Special section on Bounded Model Checking

Abstract

Hardware scheduling is a well-known and well-studied problem. This paper defines a new SAT-based formulation of automata-based scheduling and proposes for the first time a completely new resolution algorithm based on SAT solvers and bounded model checking (BMC).

The new formulation is specifically suited to control-dominated applications. Alternative executions are modeled as concurrency, where alternative behaviors are followed in parallel. This approach produces “single-path” scheduling traces instead of standard “treelike” solutions, thus enabling the use of BMC. This choice, however, creates the problem that resource bounds are treated incorrectly, due to the artificial concurrency modeling alternative behaviors. We then discuss how to take this into account, either by modifying the SAT solver or by adding extra clauses. Thus we are able to exploit SAT-based BMC to find the desired minimum latency schedule.

Our method shows significant improvements in terms of both computational efficiency and modeling power, when compared to the BDD-based approach, and in terms of the optimality of the results when compared to heuristic methods.

Keywords

Binary decision diagrams Satisfiability solvers Bounded model checking Hardware scheduling  

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cabodi G, Kondratiev A, Lavagno L, Nocco S, Quer S, Watanabe Y (2003) A BMC-Formulation for the Scheduling Problem in Highly Constrained Hardware Systems. In: BMC’03: First International Workshop on Bounded Model Checking, Boulder, Colorado, JulyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cabodi G, Kondratiev A, Lavagno L, Nocco S, Quer S, Watanabe Y (2004) A BMC-Formulation for the Scheduling Problem in Highly Constrained Hardware Systems. In: Strichman O, Biere A (eds) Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol 89. ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cabodi G, Nocco S, Quer S (2003) Improving SAT-based bounded model checking by means of BDD-based approximate traversals. In: Proc. conference on design automation and test in Europe, Munich, Germany, March 2003, pp 898–903Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cabodi G, Quer S (2004) URL: http://staff.polito.it/{gianpiero.cabodi,stefano.quer}/Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gebotys C (1993) Throughput optimized architectural synthesis. IEEE Trans VLSI Syst 1(3):254–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goldberg E, Novikov Y (2002) BerkMin: a fast and robust SAT-solver. In: Proc. conference on design automation and test in Europe, Paris, February 2002, pp 142–149Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goldberg E, Prasad M, Brayton R (2002) Using problem symmetry in search based satisfiability algorithms. In: Proc. conference on design automation and test in Europe, Paris, February 2002, pp 134–141Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gupta S, Dutt N, Gupta R, Nicolau A (2003) SPARK: A high-level synthesis framework for applying parallelizing COMPILER TRANSFORMATIONS. In: Proc. international conference on VLSIGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Haynal S (2000) Automata-based symbolic scheduling. PhD thesis, University of California at Santa Barbara, December 2000Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haynal S, Brewer F (1998) Efficient encoding for exact symbolic automata-based scheduling. In: Proc. international conference on computer-aided design, San Jose, CA, November 1998, pp 477–481Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haynal S, Brewer F (1999) Automata-based scheduling for looping DFGs. Technical report, University of California at Santa Barbara, October 1999Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hwang C-T, Lee J-H, Hsu Y-C (1991) A formal approach to the scheduling problem in high-level synthesis. IEEE Trans Comput-Aided Des 10:464–475Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khouri KS, Lakkshminarayana G, Jha NK (1999) High-level synthesis of low-power control-flow intensive circuits. IEEE Trans Comput-Aided Des 18(12):1715–1729Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lakshminarayana G, Khouri KS, Jha NK (1999) Wavesched: a novel scheduling technique for control-flow intensive design. IEEE Trans Comput-Aided Des 18:505–523Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Paulin PG, Knight JP (1989) Force-directed scheduling for the behavioral synthesis of ASICs. IEEE Trans Comput-Aided Des 8:661–679Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Radivojevic I, Brewer F (1996) A new symbolic technique for control-dependent scheduling. IEEE Trans Comput-Aided Des 15(1):45–47Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wakabayashi K, Tanaka H (1992) Global scheduling independent of control dependencies based on condition vectors. In: Proc. 29th conference on design automation, Anaheim, CA, June 1992, pp 112–115Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang CY, Parhi K (1995) High-level DSP synthesis using concurrent transformations, scheduling, and allocation. IEEE Trans Comput-Aided Des 14:274–295Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gianpiero Cabodi
    • 1
  • Alex Kondratyev
    • 2
  • Luciano Lavagno
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sergio Nocco
    • 1
  • Stefano Quer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yosinori Watanabe
    • 2
  1. 1.Dip. di Automatica e InformaticaPolitecnico di TorinoTurinItaly
  2. 2.Cadence Design Systems, Inc.BerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations