1 / 56

Verification & Synthesis of Arithmetic Datapaths using Finite Ring Algebra

Verification & Synthesis of Arithmetic Datapaths using Finite Ring Algebra. Priyank Kalla Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT-84112. Research Group Members. Graduate Students : Namrata Shekhar – PhD RTL Verification of Arithmetic Datapaths

frye
Download Presentation

Verification & Synthesis of Arithmetic Datapaths using Finite Ring Algebra

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Verification & Synthesis of Arithmetic Datapaths using Finite Ring Algebra Priyank Kalla Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT-84112

  2. Research Group Members • Graduate Students: • Namrata Shekhar – PhD • RTL Verification of Arithmetic Datapaths • Sivaram Gopalakrishnan – PhD • RTL Synthesis of Arithmetic Datapaths • Vijay Durairaj – PhD + Chris Condrat – BS/MS • SAT & SAT-based Decision Procedures • Collaborators: • Prof.Florian Enescu + Brandon • Mathematics & Statistics, Georgia State Univ.

  3. Outline • Introducing the Problems • Equivalence Verification & High-Level Synthesis • Applications: Fixed Point Arithmetic, Polynomial Signal Processing, Audio/Video/Multimedia DSP • Modeling: Poly-Functions over Finite Integer Rings • Previous Work: CAD & Symbolic Computer Algebra • Contributions • Vanishing Polynomials, Canonical Forms for Verification • Polynomial Reduction + Decomposition for Synthesis • Algorithm Design & Experimental Results • Open Problems & Challenges: CAD + Algebra

  4. The Verification & Synthesis Problems

  5. Polynomials over Bit-Vectors? • Quadratic filter design for polynomial signal processing • y = a0 . x12 + a1 . x1 + b0 . x02 + b1 . x0 + c . x0 . x1

  6. Bit-Vector Arithmetic = %2m Algebra • Represent integers as a vector of bits • Bit x0represents values 0 or 1 • Vector X[1:0] = {x1, x0} represents integers • 00, 01, 10, 11 (4 values from 0 to 3) • Bit-vector of size m: integer values in 0,…, 2m-1 • Vector X[m-1 : 0] represents integers reduced % 2m 2-bit 2-bit + * 3-bit 4-bit 2-bit 2-bit ADDER MULTIPLIER

  7. 16-bit 8-bit * 32-bit * 8-bit Fixed-size (m) bit-vector arithmetic Polynomials reduced %2m Algebra over the ring Z2m Fixed-Size (m) Data-path: Modeling • Control the datapath size: Fixed size bit-vectors (m) 16-bit 16-bit * 16-bit * 16-bit • Bit-vector of size m: integer values in 0,…, 2m-1

  8. Fixed-Size Data-path: Implementation • Signal Truncation • Keep lower order m-bits, ignore higher bits • f % 2m≡ g % 2m • Fractional Arithmetic with rounding • Keep higher order m-bits, round lower order bits • f - f %2m≡ g - g%2m 2m 2m • Saturation Arithmetic • Saturate at overflow • If( x[7:0] > 255 ) then x[7:0] = 255; • Used in image-processing applications

  9. DFF Example: Anti-Aliasing Function • F = 1 = 1 = 2√a2 + b2 2√x [Peymandoust et al, TCAD‘03] • Expand into Taylor series • F ≈ 1 x6 – 9 x5 + 115 x4 64 32 64 – 75 x3 + 279 x2 – 81 x 16 64 32 + 85 64 • Scale coefficients; Implement as bit-vectors coefficients coefficients a b x = a2 + b2 x MAC F

  10. Example: Anti-Aliasing Function • F1[15:0], F2[15:0], x[15:0] • F1 = 156x6 + 62724x5 + 17968x4 + 18661x3 + 43593 x2 + 40244x +13281 • F2 = 156x6 + 5380x5 + 1584x4 + 10469x3 + 27209 x2 + 7456x + 13281 • F1≠ F2 ; F1[15:0] = F2[15:0]; F1 % 216 = F2 % 216 • Transform the problem • F1 - F2 = 57344x5 + 16384x4 + 8192x3 + 16384x2 + 32768x ≡ 0 % 216 • F1 - F2 : Vanishing polynomial

  11. 20-bit 8-bit * 32-bit * 12-bit Multiple Word-Length Operands • Bit-vector operands with different word-lengths • Input variables : {x1,…, xd} Output variables: f, g • Input bit-widths: {n1,…, nd} Output width : m • Model as polynomial function

  12. Example: Digital Image Rejection Unit inputA[11:0], B[7:0]; outputY1[15:0], Y2[15:0]; Y1 ≠ Y2 • Y1[15:0] = Y2[15:0] • Y1 % 216 ≡ Y2 % 216

  13. Previous Work: Function Representations • Boolean Representations (f: B → B) • BDDs, MTBDDs, ADDs etc. • Moment Diagrams (f: B → Z) • BMDs, K*BMDs, HDDs etc. • Canonical DAGs for Polynomials (f: Z → Z) • Taylor Expansion Diagrams (TEDs) • Required: Representation for f: Z2m → Z2m

  14. Previous Work: Others • SAT and MILP-based techniques • Suitable for linear/multi-linear forms • Word-level ATPG, congruence closure, co-operative decision procedures • Solve linear congruences under modulo arithmetic • Theorem-Proving (HOL), term-rewriting • Abstract away the data-path size using data independence, symmetry, other abstractions • Here, datapath size (m) defines ring cardinality (Z2m)

  15. Previous Work: Symbolic Algebra • Galois Field Decomposition of Boolean Functions:GF(2m) [Pradhan, 1978 + recent work] • Symbolic Algebra Tools: Singular, Macaulay, Maple, Mathematica, ZEN, NTL, CoCoA • Polynomial equivalence over R, Q, C, Zp • Unique Factorization Domains (UFDs) : Uniquely factorize into irreducibles • Match corresponding coefficients to prove equivalence

  16. Symbolic Algebra in CAD • MODD: DAG representation of polynomials over GF(2m)[Pradhan, IWLS 05, DATE 04] • Guiding Synthesis engines using Groebner’s basis [De Micheli, TCAD 02] • Given polynomial F and Library elements <I1, …, In> • F = h1 I1 + …… + hn In • Again, works over UFDs • Approximate RTL as polynomials over Reals • Theorem Proving [Clarke et al.] • HOL + Mathematica = Analytica

  17. Why is the Problem Difficult? • Z2mis a non-UFD • f = x2 + 6xinZ8can be factorized as f f x x+6 x+2 x+4 • Atypical approach required to prove equivalence

  18. Problem Formulations + Solutions • f (x1, …, xd) % n≡g(x1, …, xd) % n • Proving equivalence is NP-hard [Ibarra, J. ACM ’83] • Vanishing polynomials [ICCD ’05, DATE’06] • f(x) – g(x) ≡ 0 % 2m : Zero Equivalence • An instance of Ideal Membership Testing • Efficient solutions over fields (Groebner’s bases): Z2m[x1,…, xd] ? • Canonical forms [ICCAD ’05] • Unique representations for polyfunctionsover Z2m • Equivalence by coefficient matching • Concepts from Hungerbuhler etal. [J. Sm. Not., ‘06 ]

  19. h: % 2m Ideal x x % 2m 0 f g f – g ? Ideal Membership Testing Z2m Z2m[x1, …, xd] • ( f – g )% 2m = 0 or ( f – g )vanishes % 2m • Membership in the Ideal of all Vanishing Polynomials in Z2m • Grobner's basis? Buchberger's algorithm? • Generate the Ideal!

  20. Ideal Membership Testing in Zp • Fermat’s Little Theorem: • x p≡ x (mod p) or • x p – x ≡ 0 (mod p) • x p –xgenerates the vanishing ideal in Zp[x] • f(x) = 0 % p iff f(x) = (xp-x)g(x) • Zp: Principal Ideal Domain • This does not followin Z2m • Generalize the result from: • %p to %pm to % (any integer) n

  21. h: % 2m Ideal x x % 2m f g f – g ? Ideal Membership Testing 0 Q P • Generate the idealof vanishing polynomials % 2m ? • Vanishing Ideal is finitely generated [Niven et al, Am. Math. Soc., ‘57] • Need an algorithm for membership testing • Representative expression for members of this ideal [Singmaster, J. Num. Th ‘74]

  22. Results From Number Theory • (f-g) % 2m = 0 means that 2m | (f-g) • n! divides a product of n consecutive numbers. • 4! divides 99X 100 X 101 X 102 • Find least n such that 2m|n! • Smarandache Function (SF). • SF(23) = 4, since 23|4! • 2mdivides the product of n = SF(2m) consecutive numbers

  23. Results From Number Theory • f ≡ gin Z23or(f - g) ≡ 0 % 23 • 23|(f - g)inZ23 • 23|4! • 4! divides the product of 4 consecutive numbers Write (f-g) as a product of SF(23) = 4 consecutive numbers • A polynomial as a product of 4 consecutive numbers? • (x+1)

  24. Results From Number Theory • f ≡ gin Z23or(f - g) ≡ 0 % 23 • 23|(f - g)inZ23 • 23|4! • 4! divides the product of 4 consecutive numbers Write (f-g) as a product of SF(23) = 4 consecutive numbers • A polynomial as a product of 4 consecutive numbers? • (x+1)(x+2)

  25. Results From Number Theory • f ≡ gin Z23or(f - g) ≡ 0 % 23 • 23|(f - g)inZ23 • 23|4! • 4! divides the product of 4 consecutive numbers Write (f-g) as a product of SF(23) = 4 consecutive numbers • A polynomial as a product of 4 consecutive numbers? • (x+1)(x+2)(x+3)

  26. Results From Number Theory • f ≡ gin Z23or(f - g) ≡ 0 % 23 • 23|(f - g)inZ23 • 23|4! • 4! divides the product of 4 consecutive numbers Write (f-g) as a product of SF(23) = 4 consecutive numbers • A polynomial as a product of 4 consecutive numbers? • (x+1)(x+2)(x+3)(x+4)

  27. Basis for factorization • S0(x) = 1 • S1(x) = (x + 1) • S2(x) = (x + 1)(x + 2) = Product of 2 consecutive numbers • S3(x) = (x + 1)(x + 2)(x + 3) = Product of 3 consecutive numbers • … • … • Sn(x) = (x + n) Sn-1(x) = Product of n consecutive numbers Rule 1: Factorize into atleast Sn(x) to vanish, where n = SF(2m).

  28. Example: Vanishing polynomial • 4th degree polynomial p in Z23 ; SF(23) = 4 • p = x4 +2x3 + 3x2 + 2x • p can be written as a product of 4 consecutive numbers. • or p = (x+1)(x+2)(x+3)(x+4) = S4(x) inZ23. • p is a vanishing polynomial.

  29. Example: Vanishing polynomial module fixed_bit_width (x, f, g); input [2:0] x; output [2:0] f, g; assign f[2:0] = x2 + 6x – 3; assign g[2:0] = 5x2 + 2x + 5; • h(x) = f(x) – g(x) = 4x2 + 4x • h(x) ≡0 for all values of x in {0,…,7} • 4x2+4x not equal to (x+1)(x+2)(x+3)(x+4) • Required: To show that h(x) is a vanishing polynomial in Z23

  30. Constraints on the Coefficient • h(x) = 4x2 + 4x = 4(x+1)(x+2) • In Z23, SF(23) = 4. Product of 4 consecutive numbers: • S4(x) = (x+1) (x+2) (x+3) (x+4) Rule 2: Coefficient has to be a multiple of bk =2m/gcd(k!, 2m) • Here, Coefficient of h(x) = 4, Degree of h(x) = 2 • b2 = 23/gcd(2!, 23) = 4 is a multiple of the coefficient

  31. Constraints on the Coefficient • h(x) = 4x2 + 4x = 4(x+1)(x+2) compensated by constant • In Z23, SF(23) = 4. Product of 4 consecutive numbers: • S4(x) = (x+1) (x+2) (x+3) (x+4) missing factors Rule 2: Coefficient has to be a multiple of bk=2m/gcd(k!, 2m) • Here, Coefficient of h(x) = 4, Degree of h(x) = k = 2 • b2 =23/gcd(2!, 23) = 4 is a multiple of the coefficient

  32. Deciding Vanishing Polynomials • Polynomial F in Z2m vanishes if • n = SF(2m),i.e. the least n such that 2m|n! • Fn is an arbitrary polynomial in Z2m[x] • akis an arbitrary integer • bk = 2m/gcd(k!,2m) F = FnSn + Σn-1ak bk Sk k=0 Rule 1 Rule 2

  33. Input: poly, 2m Calculate n = SF(2m) k = n: Reduce according to Rule 1 Divide by Sn If remainder is zero, F = FnSn, else Continue poly = 4x2 + 4xin Z23 n = SF(23) = 4 k = 4: Divide by S4 Degree (poly) = 2 < degree(S4) = 4 quo = 0, rem = 4x2 + 4x F4 = 0; Continue Algorithm Example 1 • F = FnSn + Σn-1ak bk Sk • k=0

  34. Input: poly, 2m Calculate n = SF(2m) k = n: Reduce according to Rule 1 Divide by Sn If remainder is zero, F = FnSn, else Continue poly = 4x2 + 4xin Z23 n = SF(23) = 4 k = 4: Divide by S4 Degree (poly) = 2 < degree(S4) = 4 quo = 0, rem = 4x2 + 4x F4 = 0; Continue Algorithm Example 1 • F = FnSn + Σn-1ak bk Sk • k=0

  35. Reduce according to Rule 2. Divide by Sn-1to S0 Check if quotient is a multiple of bk = 2m/gcd(k!,2m) If remainder is zero, stop. Else, continue k = 3: Divide by S3 degree (poly) = 2 < degree(S3) = 3 quo= 0, rem = 4x2 + 4xcontinue k = 2: Divide by S2 quo = 4; rem = 0 b2 = 23/gcd(2!,23) = 4 a2 = quo/ b2 = 1 ЄZ Algorithm Example 1 • F = FnSn + Σn-1ak bk Sk • k=0 poly = a2.b2.S2 = 1.4.(x+1)(x+2) ≡ 0 in Z23

  36. Reduce according to Rule 2. Divide by Sn-1to S0 Check if quotient is a multiple of bk = 2m/gcd(k!,2m) If remainder is zero, stop. Else, continue k = 3: Divide by S3 degree (poly) = 2 < degree(S3) = 3 quo= 0, rem = 4x2 + 4xcontinue k = 2: Divide by S2 quo = 4; rem = 0 b2 = 23/gcd(2!,23) = 4 a2 = quo/ b2 = 1 ЄZ Algorithm Example 1 • F = FnSn + Σn-1ak bk Sk • k=0 poly = a2.b2.S2 = 1.4.(x+1)(x+2) ≡ 0 in Z23

  37. Example 2 • poly = 5x2 + 3x+ 7 in Z23 • n = SF(23) = 4 • degree (poly) = 2 < n. Skip Rule 1, try Rule 2 • Divide by S2 • quo = 5; rem = 5 + 4x • b2 = 23/gcd(2!,23) = 4 • a2 = quo/ b2 = 5/4 is not inZ • poly does not satisfy Rule 2 • poly is not a vanishing polynomial inZ23

  38. Status of our Work - Extensions • Multiple Variables: Z2m[x1, …, xd] • Given polynomials (f, g) d variables x = <x1, …, xd> over Z2m • Prove that (f-g) = 0 % 2m • What if word-lengths are different too? • x1  Z2n1 , …… , xd  Z2nd • No problems! • Straight-forward extensions of previousconcepts • Other approach: Canonical forms of poly-functions

  39. Equivalence classes F1 G1 Polyfunctions over Z2m f F2 g G2 Z2m[x1, …, xd] Z2m • Polynomials over Z2m[x1, …, xd] • Represented by polyfunctions from Z2m[x1, …, xd] to Z2m • F1 % 2m≡ F2 % 2m=> they have thesame underlying polyfunction (f ) • Use equivalence classes of polynomials • Derive representative for each class: Canonical form

  40. Motivating our Approach module fixed_bit_width (x, f, g); input [2:0] x; output [2:0] f, g; assign f[2:0] = 5x2 + 6x - 3; assign g[2:0] = x2 + 2x + 5; • f (x) = 5x2 + 6x - 3 = (x2 + 2x + 5) + (4x2 + 4x) • f (x) = g(x) + V (x) in Z23 • V (x) = 4x2 + 4x ≡ 0 % 23 ; for x in {0,…,7} • f (x) = g (x) + 0 in Z23 • Required: To identify and eliminate such redundant sub-expressions (vanishing)

  41. Vanishing Polynomials for Reducibility • In Z23, sayf (x) = 4x2 • f (x) = f (x) - V(x) • Generate V(x) of degree 2 • V(x) = 4x2 + 4x ≡ 0 % 23 • Reduce by subtraction: • 4x2f (x) – 4x2 + 4x V(x) = - 4x = - 4x % 8 = 4x • 4x2can be reduced to 4x • Degree reduction

  42. Degree Reduction: Requirement • Generate appropriate vanishing polynomial , V(x) • f (x) = axk + a1xk-1 + … V(x) = axk + a2xk-1 + … f (x) – V(x) = bxk-1 + … • V(x):axkis the leading term • Identify constraints on • Degree : k; Coefficient : a • f (x) = axk + … If 2m|ak!, then V(x) = ak! x + k ≡ 0 % 2m k = axk + a1xk-1…..

  43. Coefficient Reduction: Example • Degree is not always reducible • In Z23, f (x) = 6x2 • a = 6, k = 2 • 8 does not divide 6 × 2! • Divide and subtract • 6x2 = 2x2 + 4x2 % 23 • 4x2 can bereduced to 4x • f (x) = 2x2 + 4x : Lower Coefficient

  44. Our Approach • Say f (x) = akxk + ak-1xk-1 + …+ a0 • In decreasing lexicographic order • Required: f (x)in reduced, minimal, unique form • Check if degree can be reduced • Check if coefficient can be reduced • Perform corresponding reductions • Repeat for all monomials …

  45. Experimental Setup • Distinct RTL designs are input to GAUT [U. de LESTER] • Extract data-flow graphs for RTL designs • Construct the corresponding polynomial representations (f, g) • Extract bit-vector size • Find the difference (f-g) and invoke the zero-testing algorithm • Reduce f, g to canonical forms…. • Algorithm implemented in MAPLE • Compare with BMD, SAT and MILP • Complexity: O(kd)

  46. Results

  47. Limitations: Mathematics versus CAD • Finite Ring Algebra = Cannot DIVIDE! • Right shift breaks the model • Overflow arithmetic versus Saturation • Comparators = non-polynomial? • Internal bit-vectors of arbitrary word-lengths • Only Yes/No Equivalence? Find bugs too! • Couple Verification with Simulation! • Arithmetic interfaced with Boolean……

  48. Intermediate Signal Truncation a[7:0] b[7:0] c[7:0] a[7:0] b[7:0] c[7:0] + + ≠ t1[7:0] t2[7:0] + + f1[8:0] f2[8:0] a = 127 b = 1 f1 = 383 c = 255 a = 127 b = 1 f2 = 127 c = 255

  49. Canonize Canonize Canonize Canonize Proposed Solution a[7:0] b[7:0] c[7:0] a[7:0] b[7:0] c[7:0] + + ≠ t1[7:0] t2[7:0] + + f1[8:0] f2[8:0] • Required: Algorithm for reduction to canonical form over

  50. Polynomial Abstraction from RTL If (x > 2b’10) then y = x * x * x Else y = x*x • Traditional modeling • . • Proposed modeling: y as a polyfunction from • : Unique representation • Issues with the proposed abstraction: • Scalability

More Related