Advertisement

Dynamic and Multidimensional Dataflow Graphs

  • Shuvra S. Bhattacharyya
  • Ed F. Deprettere
  • Joachim Keinert
Chapter

Abstract

Much of the work to date on dataflow models for signal processing system design has focused decidable dataflow models that are best suited for onedimensional signal processing. In this chapter, we review more general dataflow modeling techniques that are targeted to applications that include multidimensional signal processing and dynamic dataflow behavior. As dataflow techniques are applied to signal processing systems that are more complex, and demand increasing degrees of agility and flexibility, these classes of more general dataflow models are of correspondingly increasing interest. We begin with a discussion of two dataflow modeling techniques - multi-dimensional synchronous dataflow and windowed dataflow - that are targeted towards multidimensional signal processing applications. We then provide a motivation for dynamic dataflow models of computation, and review a number of specific methods that have emerged in this class of models. Our coverage of dynamic dataflowmodels in this chapter includes Boolean dataflow, the stream-based function model, CAL, parameterized dataflow, and enable-invoke dataflow.

Keywords

Output Port Sink Node Input Port Signal Processing System Dataflow Model 
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.
    S. S. Bhattacharyya, J. Eker, J.W. Janneck, C. Lucarz, M. Mattavelli, andM. Raulet. Overview of the MPEG reconfigurable video coding framework. Journal of Signal Processing Systems, 2010. DOI:10.1007/s11265-009-0399-3.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Kee, I. Wong, Y. Rao, and S. S. Bhattacharyya. FPGA-based design and implementation of the 3GPP-LTE physical layer using parameterized synchronous dataflow techniques. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, pages 1510–1513. Dallas, Texas, March 2010.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Gu, J. Janneck, M. Raulet, and S. S. Bhattacharyya. Exploiting statically schedulable regions in dataflow programs. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, pages 565–568. Taipei, Taiwan, April 2009.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Plishker, N. Sane, and S. S. Bhattacharyya. A generalized scheduling approach for dynamic dataflow applications. In Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition, pages 111–116. Nice, France, April 2009.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    W. Plishker, N. Sane, and S. S. Bhattacharyya. Mode grouping for more effective generalized scheduling of dynamic dataflow applications. In Proceedings of the Design Automation Conference, pages 923–926. San Francisco, July 2009.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Berg, C. Brunelli, and U. Lucking. Analyzing models of computation for software defined radio applications. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on System-on-Chip, 2008.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Y. Lin, Y. Choi, S. Mahlke, T.Mudge, and C. Chakrabarti. A parameterized dataflow language extension for embedded streaming systems. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Systems, Architectures, Modeling and Simulation, pages 10–17, July 2008.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. Nikolov and E. F. Deprettere. Parameterized stream-based functions dataflow model of computation. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Optimizations for DSP and Embedded Systems, 2008.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    W. Plishker, N. Sane, M. Kiemb, K. Anand, and S. S. Bhattacharyya. Functional DIF for rapid prototyping. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Rapid System Prototyping, pages 17–23. Monterey, California, June 2008.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Roquier, M. Wipliez, M. Raulet, J. W. Janneck, I. D. Miller, and D. B. Parlour. Automatic software synthesis of dataflow program: An MPEG-4 simple profile decoder case study. In Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Signal Processing Systems, October 2008.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Ko, C. Zissulescu, S. Puthenpurayil, S. S. Bhattacharyya, B. Kienhuis, and E. Deprettere. Parameterized looped schedules for compact representation of execution sequences in DSP hardware and software implementation. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 55(6):3126–3138, June 2007.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Keinert, C. Haubelt, and J. Teich. Modeling and analysis of windowed synchronous algorithms. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, May 2006.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. Saha, S. Puthenpurayil, and S. S. Bhattacharyya. Dataflow transformations in high-level DSP system design. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on System-on-Chip, pages 131–136. Tampere, Finland, November 2006. Invited paper.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Neuendorffer and E. Lee. Hierarchical reconfiguration of dataflow models. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Codesign, June 2004.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. Eker and J. W. Janneck. CAL language report, language version 1.0 — document edition 1. Technical Report UCB/ERL M03/48, Electronics Research Laboratory, University of California at Berkeley, December 2003.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    B. Kienhuis and E. F. Deprettere. Modeling stream-based applications using the SBF model of computation. Journal of Signal Processing Systems, 34(3):291–299, 2003.MATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    T. Stefanov and E. Deprettere. Deriving process networks from weakly dynamic applications in system-level design. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Hardware/Software Codesign and System Synthesis, pages 90–96, October 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    P. K. Murthy and E. A. Lee. Multidimensional synchronous dataflow. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 50(8):2064–2079, August 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. D.Willink, J. Eker, and J.W. Janneck. Programming specifications in CAL. In Proceedings of the OOPSLA Workshop on Generative Techniques in the context of Model Driven Architecture, 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    B. Bhattacharya and S. S. Bhattacharyya. Parameterized dataflow modeling for DSP systems. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 49(10):2408–2421, October 2001.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    S. S. Bhattacharyya, R. Leupers, and P. Marwedel. Software synthesis and code generation for DSP. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems—II: Analog and Digital Signal Processing, 47(9):849–875, September 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    S. Haykin. Adaptive Filter Theory. Prentice Hall, 1996.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    S. S. Bhattacharyya, J. T. Buck, S. Ha, and E. A. Lee. Generating compact code from dataflow specifications of multirate signal processing algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems — I: Fundamental Theory and Applications, 42(3):138–150, March 1995.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    J. T. Buck. Scheduling Dynamic Dataflow Graphs with Bounded Memory using the Token Flow Model. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California at Berkeley, September 1993.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    G. R. Gao, R. Govindarajan, and P. Panangaden. Well-behaved programs for DSP computation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, March 1992.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    J. Annevelink. HIFI: A Design Method for Implementing Signal Processing Algorithms on VLSI Processor Arrays. Ph.D. thesis, Delft University of Technology, Department of Electical Engineering, Delft, The Netherlands, 1988.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    J. Backus. Can programming be liberated from the von Neumann style? A functional style and its algebra of programs. Communications of the ACM, 21(8):613–641, 1978.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shuvra S. Bhattacharyya
    • 1
  • Ed F. Deprettere
    • 2
  • Joachim Keinert
    • 3
  1. 1.University of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.Leiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated CircuitsErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations