Advertisement

Journal of Signal Processing Systems

, Volume 85, Issue 1, pp 143–165 | Cite as

Automated Design Flow for Multi-Functional Dataflow-Based Platforms

  • Carlo Sau
  • Paolo Meloni
  • Luigi Raffo
  • Francesca Palumbo
  • Endri Bezati
  • Simone Casale-Brunet
  • Marco Mattavelli
Article

Abstract

The implementation of processing platforms supporting multiple applications by runtime reconfigurations on dedicated hardware modules requires the solution of different problems. These problems are notably not-trivial since both platform and application complexities increase year after year. As a consequence, the design process is both time and resource demanding. System configuration along with resources management and mapping remain one of the most challenging problem, particularly when runtime adaptation is required. In this direction, the ISO/IEC SC29WG11 committee (MPEG) has developed the so called MPEG-RVC standards ISO/IEC 23001-4 and 23002-4. This standard provides specifications of video codecs in the form of dataflow programs. In this paper, an integrated design flow to derive optimized multi-functional platforms directly from disjoined high-level specifications is presented. To the authors’ best of knowledge, such an optimization, synthesis and mapping methodology for coarse-grained reconfigurable systems design does not exist within the MPEG-RVC framework. The design flow presented in this paper leverages on an integrated set of independently designed tools, all supporting the RVC standard. Results assessment has been carried out on three different scenarios: an MPEG-RVC decoder, a standard baseline MPEG-RVC JPEG codec and a generalized reconfigurable multi-quality JPEG encoder. For all these scenarios, the proposed design flow has been targeted for a Xilinx Virtex 5 FPGA. Results show how this approach is capable of yielding a reconfigurable design that preserves the original performance of the stand alone non-reconfigurable platform providing, at the same time, considerable area savings featuring a larger set of functionalities. Moreover, platforms programmability, on the basis of the required functionality ID, is automatically handled at runtime without any designer effort.

Keywords

MPEG-RVC Dataflow Coarse-grained reconfiguration Multi-functional Multi-mode RVC MPEG-4 SP decoder RVC Intra MPEG-4 SP JPEG codec ITU-T.IS 1091 MDC Xronos TURNUS 

References

  1. 1.
    Bhattacharyya, S.S., Eker, J., Janneck, J.W., Lucarz, C., Mattavelli, M., & Raulet, M. Overview of the mpeg reconfigurable video coding framework. Journal of Signal Processing Systems, 63(2).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ISO/IEC 23001-4 (2009).MPEG systems tech.—Part 4: Codec configuration representation.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eker, J., & Janneck, J. CAL Language Report (ERL Technical Memo UCB/ERL M03/48).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carta, S., Pani, S., & Raffo, L. (2006). Reconfigurable coprocessor for multimedia application domain. Journal of VLSI Signal Processing Systems, 44(1-2), 135–152.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kumar, V., & Lach, J. (2006). Highly flexible multimode digital signal processing systems using adaptable components and controllers, EURASIP Jrnl. Applied Signal Proc.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sau, C., Raffo, L., Palumbo, F., Bezati, E., Casale-Brunet, S., & Mattavelli, M. (2014). Automated design flow for coarse-grained reconfigurable platforms: An rvc-cal multi-standard decoder use-case. In 2014 International Conference on Embedded Computer Systems: Architectures, Modeling, and Simulation (SAMOS XIV), IEEE (pp. 59–66).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dennis, J.B. (1974). First version of a data flow procedure language. In Symposium on Programming (pp. 362–376).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kahn, G. (1974). The semantics of simple language for parallel programming. In IFIP Congress (pp. 471–475).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee, E.A., & Messerschmitt, D.G. Static scheduling of synchronous data flow programs for digital signal processing. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 36(1).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee, E., & Parks, T. (1995). Dataflow process networks. Proceedings of the IEEE, 83(5), 773 –801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Casale-Brunet, S., Mattavelli, M., Elguindy, A., Bezati, E., Thavot, R., Roquier, G., & Janneck, J.. Methods to explore design space for MPEG RMC codec specifications, Jrnl. of Signal Proc. Image Communication: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dutt, N.D., & Mishra, P. Architecture description languages for programmable embedded systems. IEE Proc. Computers and Digital Techniques, 152(3).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rákossy, Z.E., Aponte, A.A., & Chattopadhyay, A. (2013). Exploiting architecture description language for diverse IP synthesis in heterogeneous mpsoc. In Conf. on Reconfigurable Computing and FPGAs (ReConFig) (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bezati, E., Casale-Brunet, S., Mattavelli, M., & Janneck, J. (2013). Synthesis and optimization of high-level stream programs. In Electronic System Level Synthesis Conf. (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wipliez, M., Siret, N., Carta, N., Palumbo, F., & Raffo, L. Design ip faster: Introducing the c high-level language, IP-SOC: IP-Embedded System Conference and Exhibition.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Automated generation of hardware accelerators with direct memory access from ansi/iso standard c functions, http://www.altera.com/support/ip/processors/nios2/ips-nios2_support.html.
  18. 18.
    Schreiber, R., & et al. (2002). PICO-NPA: high-level synthesis of nonprogrammable hardware accelerators. Journal of VLSI Signal Processing, 31(2), 127–142.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bond, B., Hammil, K., Litchev, L., & Singh, S. (2010). FPGA circuit synthesis of accelerator data-parallel programs. In 2010 18th IEEE Annual International Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM), IEEE. doi: 10.1109/FCCM.2010.51.
  20. 20.
    Rutten, M.J., Gangwal, O.P., van Eijndhoven, J.T.J., Jaspers, E.G.T., & Pol, E.D. (2004). Application design trajectory towards reusable coprocessors MPEG case study. In Proceedings of the 2002 2nd Workshop on Embedded Systems for Real-Time Multimedia, ESTImedia 2004, September 6-7, Stockholm, Sweden (pp. 33–38).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oh, H., & Ha, S. (1999). A hardware-software cosynthesis technique based on heterogeneous multiprocessor scheduling. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Hardware/Software Codesign, CODES 1999, Rome, Italy, 1999. doi: 10.1145/301177.301524 (pp. 183–187).
  22. 22.
    Kumar, A., Fernando, S., Ha, Y., Mesman, B., & Corporaal, H. Multiprocessor systems synthesis for multiple use-cases of multiple applications on FPGA. ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems, 13(3). doi: 10.1145/1367045.1367049.
  23. 23.
    Wildermann, S., Reimann, F., Ziener, D., & Teich, J. (2013). Symbolic system-level design methodology for multi-mode reconfigurable systems. Design Automation for Embedded Systems, 17(2), 343–375. doi: 10.1007/s10617-012-9102-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Open rvc-cal compiler (orcc), http://orcc.sourceforge.net/.
  25. 25.
    Palumbo, F., Pani, D., Manca, E., Raffo, L., Mattavelli, M., & Roquier, G. (2010). Rvc: A multi-decoder cal composer tool. In Conf. on Design and Architectures for Signal and Image Proc. (pp. 144–151).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Palumbo, F., Carta, N., & Raffo, L. (2011). The multi-dataflow composer tool: A runtime reconfigurable hdl platform composer. In Conf. on Design and Architectures for Signal and Image Proc. (pp. 178–185).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Palumbo, F., Carta, N., Pani, D., & Meloni, P. (2012). The multi-dataflow composer tool: generation of on-the-fly reconfigurable platforms, Jrnl. of Real-Time Image Proc. doi: 10.1007/s11554-012-0284-3.
  28. 28.
    Casale-Brunet, S., Mattavelli, M., & Janneck, J. (2013). Buffer optimization based on critical path analysis of a dataflow program design. In 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS). doi: 10.1109/ISCAS.2013.6572113 (pp. 1384–1387).
  29. 29.
    TURNUS, http://www.turnus.co and http://github.com/turnus (Last checked: October 2014).
  30. 30.
    Casale-Brunet, S., Alberti, C., Mattavelli, M., & Janneck, J. Turnus: a unified dataflow design space exploration framework for heterogeneous parallel systems. In 2013 Conference on Design and Archtictures for Signal and Image Processing (DASIP), Cagliari, Italy.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Janneck, J., Miller, I., & Parlour, D. (2008). Profiling dataflow programs. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conf. on Multimedia and Expo (pp. 1065–1068).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ravasi, M., & Mattavelli, M. (2005). High-abstraction level complexity analysis and memory architecture simulations of multimedia algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 15(5), 673–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Casale-Brunet, S., Mattavelli, M., & Janneck, J. (2012). Profiling of dataflow programs using post mortem causation traces. In 2012 IEEE Workshop on Signal Processing Systems (SiPS) (pp. 220–225).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bhattacharyya, S., Deprettere, E., & Theelen, B. (2013). Dynamic dataflow graphs. In Handbook of Signal Processing Systems (pp. 905–944): Springer.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    K. Ravindran. Task allocation and scheduling of concurrent applications to multiprocessor systems, Ph.D. thesis, EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley (Dec 2007).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gross, J., & Yellen, J. (2005). Graph theory and its applications, Second Edition (Discrete mathematics and its applications): Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Brunet, S.C., Bezati, E., Mattavelli, M., Canale, M., & Janneck, J.W. (2014). Execution trace graph analysis of dataflow programs: bounded buffer scheduling and deadlock recovery using model predictive control. In 2014 Conference on Design and Architectures for Signal and Image Processing (DASIP), Madrid, Spain, October, 2014.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rahman, A.A.H.A, Brunet, S.C., Alberti, C., & Mattavelli, M. (2014). A methodology for optimizing buffer sizes of dynamic dataflow fpgas implementations. In IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, ICASSP 2014, Florence, Italy, May 4-9, 2014. doi: 10.1109/ICASSP.2014.6854554(pp. 5003–5007).
  39. 39.
    Janneck, J., Miller, I., Parlour, D., Roquier, G., Wipliez, M., & Raulet, M. Synthesizing hardware from dataflow programs: an MPEG-4 simple profile decoder case study. Journal of Signal Processing Systems, 63(2), 241–249.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Palumbo, F., Sau, C., & Raffo, L. (2013). Dse and profiling of multi-context coarse-grained reconfigurable systems. In 2013 8th International Symposium on Image and Signal Processing and Analysis (ISPA), IEEE (pp. 744–749).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Independent jpeg group, http://www.ijg.org/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlo Sau
    • 1
  • Paolo Meloni
    • 1
  • Luigi Raffo
    • 1
  • Francesca Palumbo
    • 2
  • Endri Bezati
    • 3
  • Simone Casale-Brunet
    • 3
  • Marco Mattavelli
    • 3
  1. 1.Universitá degli studi di Cagliari, ITCagliariItaly
  2. 2.Universitá degli studi di Sassari, ITSassariItaly
  3. 3.École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, CHLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations