Advertisement

Finding Best Compiler Options for Critical Software Using Parallel Algorithms

  • Gabriel Luque
  • Enrique Alba
Conference paper
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 798)

Abstract

The efficiency of a software piece is a key factor for many systems. Real-time programs, critical software, device drivers, kernel OS functions and many other software pieces which are executed thousands or even millions of times per day require a very efficient execution. How this software is built can significantly affect the run time for these programs, since the context is that of compile-once/run-many. In this sense, the optimization flags used during the compilation time are a crucial element for this goal and they could make a big difference in the final execution time. In this paper, we use parallel metaheuristic techniques to automatically decide which optimization flags should be activated during the compilation on a set of benchmarking programs. The using the appropriate flag configuration is a complex combinatorial problem, but our approach is able to adapt the flag tuning to the characteristics of the software, improving the final run times with respect to other spread practices.

Notes

Acknowledgement

This research has been partially funded by the Spanish MINECO and FEDER projects (TIN2014-57341-R (http://moveon.lcc.uma.es), TIN2016-81766-REDT (http://cirti.es), and TIN2017-88213-R (http://6city.lcc.uma.es).

References

  1. 1.
    Software engineering software product quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE) Software product quality and system quality in use models. Standard, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hassan, M.M., Afzal, W., Lindström, B., Shah, S.M.A., Andler, S.F., Blom, M.: Testability and software performance: a systematic mapping study. In: Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 1566–1569. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stallman, R.M.: GCC DeveloperCommunity: Using the GNU Compiler Collection: A GNU Manual for GCC Version 4.3. 3. CreateSpace, Paramount (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nobre, R., Reis, L., Cardoso, J.: Compiler phase ordering as an orthogonal approach for reducing energy consumption. In: Proceedings of the 19th Workshop on Compilers for Parallel Computing (CPC16) (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Machado, R.S., Almeida, R.B., Jardim, A.D., Pernas, A.M., Yamin, A.C., Cavalheiro, G.G.H.: Comparing erformance of C compilers optimizations on different multicore architectures. In: Computer Architecture and High Performance Computing Workshops (SBAC-PADW), pp. 25–30. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoste, K., Eeckhout, L.: Cole: Compiler optimization level exploration. In: Proceedings of the 6th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Code Generation and Optimization, CGO 2008, pp. 165–174. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhong, S., Shen, Y., Hao, F.: Tuning compiler optimization options via simulated annealing. In: Second International Conference on Future Information Technology and Management Engineering, FITME 2009, pp. 305–308. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kumar, T.S., Sakthivel, S., Kumar, S.: Optimizing code by selecting compiler flags using parallel GA on multicore CPUs. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 6, 544–551 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mladenovic, N., Hansen, P.: Variable neighborhood search. Comput. Oper. Res. 24(11), 1097–1100 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alba, E.: Parallel Metaheuristics: A New Class of Algorithms. Wiley, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Crainic, T.G., Toulouse, M.: Parallel meta-heuristics. In: Handbook of Metaheuristics, pp. 497–541. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fulgham, B., Gouy, I.: The computer language benchmarks game. http://shootout.alioth.debian.org (2012)
  13. 13.
    Pereira, R., Couto, M., Ribeiro, F., Rua, R., Cunha, J., Fernandes, J.P., Saraiva, J.: Energy efficiency across programming languages: how do energy, time, and memory relate? In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering, SLE 2017, pp. 256–267. ACM, New York (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Andalucía TechUniversity of MálagaMálagaSpain

Personalised recommendations