Advertisement

Language Support for Pipelining Wavefront Computations

  • Bradford L. Chamberlain
  • E.Christopher Lewis
  • Lawrence Snyder
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1863)

Abstract

Wavefront computations, characterized by a data dependent flow of computation across a data space, are receiving increasing attention as an important class of parallel computations. Though sophisticated compiler optimizations can often produce efficient pipelined implementations from sequential representations, we argue that a language-based approach to representing wavefront computations is a more practical technique. A language-based approach is simple for the programmer yet unambiguously parallel. In this paper we introduce simple array language extensions that directly support wavefront computations. We show how a programmer may reason about the extensions’ legality and performance; we describe their implementation and give performance data demonstrating the importance of parallelizing these codes.

Keywords

Loop Nest Prime Operator Code Fragment Array Reference Language Support 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Jeanne C. Adams, Walter S. Brainerd, Jeanne T. Martin, Brian T. Smith, and Jerrold L. Wagener. Fortran 90 Handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1992.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bradford L. Chamberlain, Sung-Eun Choi, E Christopher Lewis, Calvin Lin, Lawrence Snyder, and W. Derrick Weathersby. ZPL’s WYSIWYG performance model. In Third IEEE International Workshop on High-level Parallel Programming Models and Supportive Environments, pages 50–61, March 1998.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bradford L. Chamberlain, Sung-Eun Choi, E Christopher Lewis, Lawrence Snyder, W Derrick Weathersby, and Calvin Lin. The case for high-level parallel programming in ZPL. IEEE Computational Science and Engineering, 5(3):76–85, July–September 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bradford L. Chamberlain, E Christopher Lewis, Calvin Lin, and Lawrence Snyder. Regions: An abstraction for expressing array computation. In ACM SIGAPL/SIGPLAN International Conference on Array Programming Languages, pages 41–49, August 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    W Crowley, C. P. Hendrickson, and T. I. Luby. The SIMPLE code. Technical Report UCID-17715, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, 1978.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ron Cytron. Doacross: Beyond vectorization for multiprocessors. In International Conference on Parallel Processing, pages 836–844, 1986.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    High Performance Fortran Forum. High Performance Fortran Language Specification, Version 2.0. January 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Seema Hiranandani, Ken Kennedy, and Chau-Wen Tseng. Compiler optimizations for Fortran D on MIMD distributed-memory machines. In Supercomputing’ 91, pages 96–100, Albuquerque, NM, November 1991.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seema Hiranandani, Ken Kennedy, and Chau-Wen Tseng. Evaluation of compiler optimizations for Fortran D on MIMD distributed-memory machines. In International Conference on Supercomputing, pages 1–14, Washington, DC, July 1992.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. R. Koch, R. S. Baker, and R. E. Alcouffe. Solution of the first-order form of three-dimensional discrete ordinates equations on a massively parallel machine. Transactions of the American Nuclear Society, 65:198–9, 1992.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Charles H. Koelbel, David B. Loveman, Robert S. Schreiber, Guy L. Steele Jr., and Mary E. Zosel. The High Performance Fortran Handbook. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1993.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Christopher Lewis, Calvin Lin, and Lawrence Snyder. The implementation and evaluation of fusion and contraction in array languages. In ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 50–59, June 1998.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    E Christopher Lewis and Lawrence Snyder. Pipelining wavefront computations: Experiences and performance. Submitted for publication, November 1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C. Lin, L. Snyder, R. Anderson, B. Chamberlain, S. Choi, G. Forman, E. Lewis, and W. D. Weathersby. ZPL vs. HPF: A comparison of performance and programming style. Technical Report 95-11-05, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington, 1994.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    TonA. Ngo. The Role of Performance Models in Parallel Programming and Languages. PhD thesis, University of Washington, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, 1997.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hiroshi Ohta, Tasuhiko Saito, Masahiro Kainaga, and Hiroyuki Ono. Optimal tile size adjustment in compiling general DOACROSS loop nests. In International Conference on Supercomputing, pages 270–9, Barcelona, Spain, 1995.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Anne Rogers and Keshav Pingali. Process decomposition through locality of reference. In ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 69–80, June 1989.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marc Snir, Steve Otto, Steven Huss-Lederman, David Walker, and Jack Dongarra. MPI—The Complete Reference. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2nd edition, 1998.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lawrence Snyder. The ZPL Programmer’s Guide. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1999.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    David Sundaram-Stukel and Mark K. Vernon. Predictive analysis of a wavefront application using LogGP. In Seventh ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming, May 1999.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Michael Wolfe. High Performance Compilers for Parallel Computing. Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, CA, 1996.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    ZPL Project. ZPL project homepage. http://www.cs.washington.edu/research/zpl.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bradford L. Chamberlain
    • 1
  • E.Christopher Lewis
    • 1
  • Lawrence Snyder
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations