A Case for Visualization-Integrated System-Level Design Space Exploration

  • Andy D. Pimentel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3553)

Abstract

Design space exploration plays an essential role in the system-level design of embedded systems. It is imperative therefore to have efficient and effective exploration tools in the early stages of design, where the design space is largest. System-level simulation frameworks that aim for early design space exploration create large volumes of simulation data in exploring alternative architectural solutions. Interpreting and drawing conclusions from these copious simulation results can be extremely cumbersome. In other domains that also struggle with interpreting large volumes of data, such as scientific computing, data visualization is an invaluable tool. Such visualization is often domain specific and has not become widely used in evaluating the results of computer architecture simulations. Surprisingly little research has been undertaken in the dynamic use of visualization to guide architectural design space exploration. In this paper, we plead for the study and development of generic methods and techniques for run-time visualization of system-level computer architecture simulations. We further explain that these techniques must be scalable and interactive, allowing designers to better explore complex (embedded system) architectures.

Keywords

Embed System Computer Architecture Design Space Exploration Design Automation Conference Transaction Level Modeling 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors: Executive summary (2003), http://public.itrs.net/Files/2003ITRS/Home2003.htm
  2. 2.
    Keutzer, K., Malik, S., Newton, A., Rabaey, J., Vincentelli, A.S.: System level design: Orthogonalization of concerns and platform-based design. IEEE Trans. on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 19 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gajski, D.D.: System Level Design Flow: What is needed and What is not. Technical report, CECS, University of California at Irvine, CECS-TR-02-33 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balarin, F., et al.: Metropolis: An integrated electronic system design environment. IEEE Computer 36 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cassidy, A., Paul, J., Thomas, D.: Layered, multi-threaded, high-level performance design. In: Proc. of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE) (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mohanty, S., Prasanna, V.K.: Rapid system-level performance evaluation and optimization for application mapping onto SoC architectures. In: Proc. of the IEEE International ASIC/SOC Conference (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pimentel, A.D., Lieverse, P., van der Wolf, P., Hertzberger, L.O., Deprettere, E.F.: Exploring embedded-systems architectures with Artemis. IEEE Computer 34, 57–63 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pimentel, A.D.: The Artemis workbench for system-level performance evaluation of embedded systems. Int. Journal of Embedded Systems (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grötker, T., Liao, S., Martin, G., Swan, S.: System Design with SystemC. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kogel, T., et al.: Virtual architecture mapping: A SystemC based methodology for architectural exploration of system-on-chip designs. In: Proc. of the Int. workshop on Systems, Architectures, Modeling and Simulation (SAMOS) (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Buck, J., Ha, S., Lee, E.A., Messerschmitt, D.G.: Ptolemy: A framework for simulating and prototyping heterogeneous systems. Int. Journal of Computer Simulation 4, 155–182 (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Kock, E.A., Essink, G., Smits, W.J.M., van der Wolf, P., Brunel, J.Y., Kruijtzer, W.M., Lieverse, P., Vissers, K.A.: Yapi: Application modeling for signal processing systems. In: Proc. of the Design Automation Conference (DAC), pp. 402–405 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stefanov, T., Kienhuis, B., Deprettere, E.F.: Algorithmic transformation techniques for efficient exploration of alternative application instances. In: Proc. of the 10th Int. Symposium on Hardware/Software Codesign (CODES 2002), pp. 7–12 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Turjan, A., Kienhuis, B., Deprettere, E.F.: Translating affine nested loop programs to process networks. In: Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Compilers, Architectures and Synthesis for Embedded Systems (CASES) (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mihal, A., Kulkarni, C., Sauer, C., Vissers, K., Moskewicz, M., Tsai, M., Shah, N., Weber, S., Jin, Y., Keutzer, K., Malik, S.: Developing architectural platforms: A disciplined approach. IEEE Design and Test of Computers 19, 6–16 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lahiri, K., Raghunathan, A., Dey, S.: System-level performance analysis for designing on-chip communication architectures. IEEE Trans. on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 20, 768–783 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cai, L., Gajski, D.: Transaction level modeling: An overview. In: Proc. of CODES-ISSS, pp. 19–24 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Živković, V., van der Wolf, P., Deprettere, E.F., de Kock, E.A.: Design space exploration of streaming multiprocessor architectures. In: Proc. of the IEEE Workshop on Signal Processing Systems (SiPS) (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Densmore, D., Rekhi, S., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.: Microarchitecture development via Metropolis successive platform refinement. In: Proc. of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE) (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Peng, J., Abdi, S., Gajski, D.: Automatic model refinement for fast architecture exploration. In: Proc. of the Int. Conf. on VLSI Design, pp. 332–337 (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Abdi, S., Shin, D., Gajski, D.: Automatic communication refinement for system level design. In: Proc. of the Design Automation Conference (DAC), pp. 300–305 (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lieverse, P., van der Wolf, P., Deprettere, E.F.: A trace transformation technique for communication refinement. In: Proc. of the 9th Int. Symposium on Hardware/Software Codesign (CODES), pp. 134–139 (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nicolescu, G., Yoo, S., Jerraya, A.A.: Mixed-level cosimulation for fine gradual refinement of communication in SoC design. In: Proc. of the Int. Conference on Design, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE) (2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Haubelt, C., Mostaghim, S., Slomka, F., Teich, J., Tyagi, A.: Hierarchical synthesis of embedded systems using evolutionary algorithms. In: Evolutionary Algorithms for Embedded System Design. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Palesi, M., Givargis, T.: Multi-objective design space exploration using genetic algorithms. In: Proc. of the 10th Int. Symposium on Hardware/Software Codesign (CODES) (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thiele, L., Chakraborty, S., Gries, M., Künzli, S.: A framework for evaluating design tradeoffs in packet processing architectures. In: Proc. of the ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Erbas, C., Erbas, S.C., Pimentel, A.D.: A multiobjective optimization model for exploring multiprocessor mappings of process networks. In: Proc. of the IEEE/ACM CODES+ISSS Conference (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Benini, L., Micheli, G.D.: Networks on chips: A new SoC paradigm. IEEE Computer 35, 70–80 (2002)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kok, H.C., Pimentel, A.D., Hertzberger, L.O.: Runtime visualization of computer architecture simulations. In: Proc. of the Workshop on Performance Analysis and its Impact on Design (in conjunction with ISCA 1997), pp. 15–24 (1997)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marwedel, P., Sirocic, B.: Multimedia components for the visualization of dynamic behavior in computer architectures. In: Proc. of the Workshop of Computer Architecture Education (WCAE 2003) (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yehezkel, C., Yurcik, W., Pearson, M., Armstrong, D.: Three simulator tools for teaching computer architecture: Easycpu, little man computer, and rtlsim. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC) 1 (2001)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Coe, P.S., et al.: A hierarchical computer architecture design and simulation environment. ACM TOMACS 8, 431–446 (1998)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Berkbigler, K., Bush, B., Davis, K., Moss, N., Smith, S.: À la carte: A simulation framework for extreme-scale hardware architectures. In: Proc. of the IASTED International Conference on Modelling and Simulation (2003)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stolte, C., Bosch, R., Hanrahan, P., Rosenblum, M.: Visualizing application behavior on superscalar processors. In: Proc. of the Fifth IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization (1999)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fang, W., Wang, C.L., Zhu, W., Lau, F.: Pat: A postmortem object access pattern analysis and visualization tool. In: Proc of the Int. Workshop on Distributed Shared Memory on Clusters, at CCGrid 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hlavacs, H., Kvasnicka, D., Ueberhuber, C.W.: Clue — a tool for cluster evaluation. In: Distributed and Parallel Systems (DAPSYS), pp. 61–64 (2000)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bosch, R., Stolte, C., Tang, D., Gerth, J., Rosenblum, M., Hanrahan, P.: Rivet: A flexible environment for computer systems visualization. Computer Graphics 34 (2000)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bosch, R.P.: Using Visualization to Understand the Behavior of Computer Systems. PhD thesis, Stanford University (2001)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mihalik, A.: Vista: A visualization tool for computer architects. Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2004)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lee, E.A., Neuendorffer, S.: MoML - a Modeling Markup Language in XML, version 0.4. Technical Report UCB/ERL M00/8, Electronics Research Lab, University of California, Berkeley (2000)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Coffland, J.E., Pimentel, A.D.: A software framework for efficient system-level performance evaluation of embedded systems. In: Proc. of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2003), pp. 666–671 (2003)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mulder, J., van Wijk, J., van Liere, R.: A survey for computational steering environments. Future Generation Computer Systems 15 (1999)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    van Liere, R., Mulder, J., van Wijk, J.: Computational steering. Future Generation Computer Systems 12 (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andy D. Pimentel
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Systems Architecture Group, Informatics InstituteUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations