Automated transformation for performance-critical kernels

LCSD 2007 - Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Library-Centric Software Design

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 109-119

  Yi, Qing ^a   Whaley, R Clint ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATED TRANSFORMATIONS; COMPUTATIONAL KERNELS; KERNEL OPTIMIZATIONS; LIBRARY ROUTINES; NEW APPROACHES; OPTIMIZED IMPLEMENTATION; PERFORMANCE LEVEL; SCIENTIFIC APPLICATIONS; TRANSFORMATION ENGINE; TUNING PARAMETER;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; OPTIMIZATION;

SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 77952326947     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1512762.1512773     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. O. S. Bagge, K. T. Kalleberg, M. Haveraaen, and E. Visser. Design of the CodeBoost transformation system for domain-specific optimisation of C++ programs. In D. Binkley and P. Tonella, editors, Third International Workshop on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation (SCAM 2003), pages 65-75, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, September 2003. IEEE Computer Society Press.
2. G. Baumgartner, A. Auer, D. E. Bernholdt, A. Bibireata, V. Choppella, D. Cociorva, X. Gao, R. J. Harrison, S. Hirata, S. Krishnamoorthy, S. Krishnan, C.-C. Lam, Q. Lu, M. Nooijen, R. M. Pitzer, J. Ramanujam, P. Sadayappan, and A. Sibiryakov. Synthesis of high-performance parallel programs for a class of ab initio quantum chemistry models. Proc. IEEE, Special Issue on Program Generation, Optimization, and Adaptation, 93(2), 2005.
3. O. Beckmann, A. Houghton, M. Mellor, and P. H. J. Kelly. Runtime code generation in C++ as a foundation for domain-specific optimisation. In C. Lengauer, D. Batory, C. Consel, and M. Odersky, editors, Domain-Specific Program Generation, volume LNCS 3016, pages 291-306, Internationnal Seminar, Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, March 23-28, 2003, Revised Papers, 2004.
4. P. Bientinesi, J. A. Gunnels, M. E. Myers, E. Quintana-Orti, and R. van de Geijn. The science of deriving dense linear algebra algorithms. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 31(1):1-26, March 2005.
5. C. Chen, J. Chame, and M. Hall. Combining models and guided empirical search to optimize for multiple levels of the memory hierarchy. In CGO, San Jose, CA, USA, March 2005.
6. A. Cohen, S. Girbal, D. Parello, M. Sigler, O. Temam, and N. Vasilache. Facilitating the search for compositions of program transformations. In ICS, pages 151-160, Boston, MA, USA, June 2005.
7. J. Demmel, J. Dongarra, V. Eijkhout, E. Fuentes, A. Petitet, R. Vuduc, C. Whaley, and K. Yelick. Self adapting linear algebra algorithms and software. Proc. IEEE, Special Issue on Program Generation, Optimization, and Adaptation, 93(2), 2005.
8. S. Donadio, J. Brodman, T. Roeder, K. Yotov, D. Barthou, A. Cohen, M. J. Garzaŕan, D. Padua, and K. Pingali. A language for the compact representation of multiple program versions. In LCPC, Hawthorne, NY, USA, October 2005.
9. D. R. Engler, W. Hsieh, and M. Kaashoek. 'C: A language for highlevel, efficient, and machine-independent code generation. In POPL, pages 131-144, 1996. .
10. M. Frigo and S. Johnson. FFTW: An Adaptive Software Architecture for the FFT. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), volume 3, page 1381, 1998.
11. M. Frigo and S. G. Johnson. The design and implementation of FFTW3. Proc. IEEE, Special Issue on Program Generation, Optimization, and Adaptation, 93(2), 2005.
12. G. Fursin, A. Cohen, M. O'Boyle, and O. Temam. A pratical method for quickly evaluating program optimizations. In HiPEAC, November 2005.
13. B. Grant, M. Mock, M. Philipose, C. Chambers, and S. J. Eggers. DyC: An expressive annotation-directed dynamic compiler for C. Theoretical Computer Science, 248:147-199, 2000.
14. N. D. Jones, C. K. Gomard, and P. Sestoft. Partial evaluation and automatic program generation. Prentice-Hall, 1993.
15. T. Kisuki, P. M. Knijnenburg, and M. F. O'Boyle. Combined selection of tile sizes and unroll factors using iterative compilation. In PACT, Philadelphia, PA, October 2000.
16. G. Pike and P. Hilfinger. Better tiling and array contraction for compiling scientific programs. In SC, Baltimore, MD, USA, November 2002.
17. M. Püschel, J. M. F. Moura, J. Johnson, D. Padua, M. Veloso, B. W. Singer, J. Xiong, F. Franchetti, A. Gäcíc, Y. Voronenko, K. Chen, R. W. Johnson, and N. Rizzolo. SPIRAL: Code generation for DSP transforms. Proc. IEEE, Special Issue on Program Generation, Optimization, and Adaptation, 93(2), 2005.
18. A. Qasem and K. Kennedy. A cache-conscious profitability model for empirical tuning of loop fusion. In LCPC, October 2005.
19. A. Qasem, K. Kennedy, and J. Mellor-Crummey. Automatic tuning of whole applications using direct search and a performance-based transformation system. In Proc. Los Alamos Computer Science Institute (LACSI) Symposium, 2004.
20. See page for details. FFTW homepage. http://www.fftw.org/.
21. M. Stephenson and S. Amarasinghe. Predicting unroll factors using supervised classification. In CGO, San Jose, CA, USA, March 2005.
22. T. L. Veldhuizen and D. Gannon. Active Libraries: Rethinking the roles of compilers and libraries. In Proceedings of the SIAM Workshop on Object Oriented Methods for Interoperable Scientific and Engineering Computing, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1998. SIAM.
23. E. Visser. A survey of strategies in rule-based program transformation systems. J. Symbolic Computation, 40(1):831-873, 2005. Special issue on Reduction Strategies in Rewriting and Programming.
24. R. Vuduc, J. Demmel, and J. Bilmes. Statistical models for automatic performance tuning. International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications, 18(1):65-94, 2004.
25. R. C. Whaley and A. Petitet. Atlas homepage. http://math-atlas. sourceforge.net/.
26. R. C. Whaley and A. Petitet. Minimizing development and maintenance costs in supporting persistently optimized BLAS. Software: Practice and Experience, 35(2):101-121, February 2005. http://www.cs.utsa.edu/∼whaley/papers/ spercw04.ps.
27. R. C. Whaley, A. Petitet, and J. J. Dongarra. Automated empirical optimization of software and the ATLAS project. Parallel Computing, 27(1-2):3-35, 2001. Also available as University of Tennessee LAPACK Working Note #147, UT-CS-00-448, 2000 (www.netlib.org/lapack/lawns/lawn147.ps).
28. R. C. Whaley and D. B. Whalley. Tuning high performance kernels through empirical compilation. In The 2005 International Conference on Parallel Processing, June 2005.
29. Q. Yi, K. Kennedy, and V. Adve. Transforming complex loop nests for locality. The Journal Of Supercomputing, 27:219-264, 2004.
30. Q. Yi, K. Seymour, H. You, R. Vuduc, and D. Quinlan. Poet: Parameterized optimizations for empirical tuning. In Workshop on Performance Optimization for High-Level Languages and Libraries, Mar 2007.
31. K. Yotov, X. Li, G. Ren, M. Garzaran, D. Padua, K. Pingali, and P. Stodghill. Is search really necessary to generate high-performance BLAS? Proc. IEEE, Special Issue on Program Generation, Optimization, and Adaptation, 93(2), 2005.
32. Y. Zhao, Q. Yi, K. Kennedy, D. Quinlan, and R. Vuduc. Parameterizing loop fusion for automated empirical tuning. Technical Report UCRLTR- 217808, Center for Applied Scientific Computing, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, December 2005.