skip to main content
10.1145/377792.377826acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Tools for application-oriented performance tuning

Authors Info & Claims
Published:17 June 2001Publication History

ABSTRACT

Application performance tuning is a complex process that requires assembling various types of information and correlating it with source code to pinpoint the causes of performance bottlenecks. Existing performance tools don't adequately support this process in one or more dimensions. We discuss some of the critical utility and usability issues for application-level performance analysis tools in the context of two performance tools, MHSim and HPCView, that we built to support our own work on data layout and optimizing compilers. MHsim is a memory hierarchy simulator that produces source-level information not otherwise available about memory hierarchy utilization and the causes of cache conflicts. HPCView is a tool that combines data from arbitrary sets of instrumentation sources and correlates it with program source code. Both tools report their results in scope-hierarchy views of the corresponding source code and produce their output as HTML databases that can be analyzed portably and collaboratively using a commodity browser. In addition to daily use within our group, the tools are being used successfully by several code development teams in DoD and DoE laboratories.

References

  1. 1.D. Callahan, J. Cocke, and K. Kennedy. Estimating interlock and improving balance for pipelined machines. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 5(4):334-358, August 1988.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. 2.Carnival Web Site. http://www.cs.rochester.edu/u/leblanc/prediction.html.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.H. Davis, S. Goldschmidt, and J. Hennessy. Tango: A Multiprocessor Simulation and Tracing System. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Parallel Processing, pages 99-107, August 1991.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.Jeffrey Dean, James E. Hicks, Carl A. Waldspurger, William E. Weihl, and George Chrysos. ProfileMe: Hardware support for instruction-level profiling on out-of-order processors. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual International Symposium on Microarchitecture (Micro '97), December 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5.A. J. Goldberg and J. Hennessy. MTOOL: A Method for Isolating Memory Bottlenecks in Shared Memory Multiprocessor Programs. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Parallel Processing, pages 251-257, August 1991.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.W3C Math Working Group. Mathematical markup language (mathml) 1.01 specification, July 1999. http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-MathML.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.E. Schnarr J. Larus. EEL: Machine-Independent Executable Editing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 291-300, June 1995.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.C. Janssen. The Visual Profiler. http://aros.ca.sandia.gov/~cljanss/perf/vprof/doc/README.html.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.D. Reed L. DeRose, Y. Zhang. SvPablo: A Multi-Language Performance Analysis System. In 10th International Conference on Performance Tools, pages 352-355, September 1998.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.A. Lebeck and D. Wood. Cache profiling and the spec benchmarks: A case study. IEEE Computer, October 1994.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11.T. LeBlanc M. Crovella. Parallel Performance Prediction Using Lost Cycles. In Proceedings Supercomputing '94, pages 600-610, November 1994.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.D. Ofelt M. Martonosi and M. Heinrich. Integrating Performance Monitoring and Communication in Parallel Computers. In ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, pages 138-147, May 1996.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13.M. Martonosi, A. Gupta, and T. Anderson. MemSpy: Analyzing Memory System Bottlenecks in Programs. In ACM SIGMETRICS and PERFORMANCE '92 International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, pages 1-12, June 1992.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14.M. Rosenblum, E. Bugnion, S. Devine, and S. Herrod. Using the SimOS machine simulator to study complex systems. ACM Transactions on Modelling and Computer Simulation, 7:78-103, January 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 15.M. Zagha, B. Larson, S. Turner, and M. Itzkowitz. Performance Analysis Using the MIPS R10000 Performance Counters. In Proceedings Supercomputing '96, November 1996.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Tools for application-oriented performance tuning

          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
            ICS '01: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Supercomputing
            June 2001
            510 pages
            ISBN:158113410X
            DOI:10.1145/377792

            Copyright © 2001 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: 17 June 2001

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • Article

            Acceptance Rates

            ICS '01 Paper Acceptance Rate45of133submissions,34%Overall Acceptance Rate584of2,055submissions,28%

            Upcoming Conference

            ICS '24

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader