skip to main content
10.1145/1629435.1629445acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesesweekConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An efficient technique for analysis of minimal buffer requirements of synchronous dataflow graphs with model checking

Authors Info & Claims
Published:11 October 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

Synchronous Dataflow (SDF) is a widely-used model of computation for digital signal processing and multimedia applications, which are typically implemented on memory constrained hardware platforms. SDF can be statically analyzed and scheduled, and the memory requirement for correct execution can be predicted at compile time. In this paper, we present an efficient technique based on model-checking for exact analysis of minimal buffer requirement of an SDF graph to guarantee deadlock-free execution. Performance evaluation shows that our approach can achieve significant performance improvements compared to related work.

References

  1. http://www.cse.ust.hk/~weichen/sdf_ex.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. http://www.es.ele.tue.nl/sadf/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M. Ade, R. Lauwereins, and J. A. Peperstraete. Data memory minimisation for synchronous dataflow graphs emulated on DSP-FPGA targets. In Design Automation Conference, pages 64--69, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. S. Bhattacharyya, P. K. Murthy, and E. A. Lee. Software Synthesis from Dataflow Graphs. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. A. Cimatti, E. Clarke, E. Giunchiglia, F. Giunchiglia, M. Pistore, M. Roveri, R. Sebastiani, and A. Tacchella. NuSMV 2: An OpenSource Tool for Symbolic Model Checking. In International Conference on Computer-Aided Verification (CAV), 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. S. Edelkamp, A. Lluch-Lafuente, and S. Leue. Directed explicit model checking with hsf-spin. In M. B. Dwyer, editor, SPIN, volume 2057 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 57--79. Springer, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. M. Geilen, T. Basten, and S. Stuijk. Minimising buffer requirements of synchronous dataflow graphs with model checking. In DAC '05: Proceedings of the 42nd annual conference on Design automation, pages 819--824, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. S. Goddard and K. Jeffay. Managing memory requirements in the synthesis of real-time systems from processing graphs. In Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium, 1998. Proceedings. Fourth IEEE, pages 59--70, Jun 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Z. Gu, M. Yuan, N. Guan, M. Lv, X. He, Q. Deng, and G. Yu. Static scheduling and software synthesis for dataflow graphs with symbolic model-checking. In RTSS '07: Proceedings of the 28th IEEE International Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 353--364, Washington, DC, USA, 2007. IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. G. J. Holzmann. The model checker spin. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 23(5):279--295, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Horstmannshoff and H. Meyr. Optimized system synthesis of complex rt level building blocks from multirate dataflow graphs. In ISSS, pages 38--43, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. D. Kim, M. Kim, and S. Ha. A case study of system level specification and software synthesis of multimode multimedia terminal. In ESTImedia, pages 57--64, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. S. Kwon, H. Jung, and S. Ha. H.264 decoder algorithm specification and simulation in simulink and peace. In International SoC Design Conference, pages 9--12, Oct 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. E. A. Lee and D. G. Messerschmitt. Static scheduling of synchronous data flow programs for digital signal processing. IEEE Trans. Comput., 36(1):24--35, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. P. K. Murthy and S. S. Bhattacharyya. Memory Management for Synthesis of DSP Software. CRC Press, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. H. Oh, N. Dutt, and S. Ha. Memory optimal single appearance schedule with dynamic loop count for synchronous dataflow graphs. In ASP-DAC '06: Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Asia South Pacific design automation, pages 497--502, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. T. M. Parks. Bounded Scheduling of Process Networks. PhD thesis, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. S. Stuijk, M. Geilen, and T. Basten. Exploring trade-offs in buffer requirements and throughput constraints for synchronous dataflow graphs. Design Automation Conference, 2006 43rd ACM/IEEE, pages 899--904, 24{28 July 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. An efficient technique for analysis of minimal buffer requirements of synchronous dataflow graphs with model checking

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CODES+ISSS '09: Proceedings of the 7th IEEE/ACM international conference on Hardware/software codesign and system synthesis
      October 2009
      498 pages
      ISBN:9781605586281
      DOI:10.1145/1629435

      Copyright © 2009 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 11 October 2009

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate280of864submissions,32%

      Upcoming Conference

      ESWEEK '24
      Twentieth Embedded Systems Week
      September 29 - October 4, 2024
      Raleigh , NC , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader