1 / 55

Software Engineering Methodology for Reconfigurable Platforms

Software Engineering Methodology for Reconfigurable Platforms. Damien Picard and Loic Lagadec Architectures et Systèmes, Lab-STICC Université de Bretagne Occidentale, France ESUG’09 Brest, France, 2009. Introduction. Increasing complexity of modern System-on-Chip

ronaldbautista
Download Presentation

Software Engineering Methodology for Reconfigurable Platforms

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. Software Engineering Methodology for Reconfigurable Platforms Damien Picard and Loic Lagadec Architectures et Systèmes, Lab-STICC Université de Bretagne Occidentale, France ESUG’09 Brest, France, 2009

  2. Introduction • Increasing complexity of modern System-on-Chip • Difficulty to program and to validate applications • Shrinking time-to-market • Common techniques for hardware validation • Testing/debugging at a very low abstraction level  Time-consuming and burdensome • Need for productive methodologies with an higher level approach • Software development benefits from very efficient techniques • Our approach: applying software engineering methodologies to hardware design

  3. Aim of this talk • This talk focuses on a key issue: validation of hardware application targeting RA • An HL synthesis flow for reconfigurable architectures based on MADEO [ESUG 08] • Multi-level simulation: from behavioral to hardware • Interfacing with third-party tools through code generation • Software-like debugging features embedded in hardware • Advocates for the use of software engineering techniques • Short development cycles, use of OO models, code generation, etc.

  4. Outline • Overview of Reconfigurable Architectures • OO methodology for synthesis on RA • Simulation and testing methodology • Software-like debugging for RA • Conclusion

  5. Outline • Overview of Reconfigurable Architectures • OO methodology for synthesis on RA • Simulation and testing methodology • Software-like debugging for RA • Conclusion

  6. Reconfigurable Architectures • A reconfigurable architecture is a run-time programmable architecture based on the hardware reconfiguration • Used as flexible hardware accelerators for intensive computations • Based on Look-Up-Table (LUT) = memory • General-purpose and high parallelism • Slow and area/power-inefficient (routing overhead) • Several reconfigurable platforms • FPGAs (vendors, e.g. Xilinx, Altera) • eFPGAs (e.g. M2000, Menta) • RSoCs (e.g. Morpheus project): RA IP composition

  7. Reconfigurable Architectures • Trade-off between flexibility/performance • Functionality of the circuit determined by a configuration Program Data Configuration Data Data Processor Reconfigurable Architecture ASIC Results Results Results Flexibility Performance

  8. Reconfigurable Architectures • FPGA: a general overview • Organized as a mesh of look-up-tables • Possibly heterogeneous + * - Computing resource i1 µP LUT LUT I1-i2 IO LUT i2 LUT i1 i1 LUT LUT I1*i2 I1+i2 i2 i2 Programmable interconnection LUT LUT LUT

  9. Outline • Overview of Reconfigurable Architectures • OO methodology for synthesis on RA • Simulation and testing methodology • Software-like debugging for RA • Conclusion

  10. The MADEO framework • Loic Lagadec’s talk: “MADEO: A CAD Tool for Reconfigurable Hardware” [ESUG 08] • MADEO is a generic synthesis framework for RA • Set of open tools designed with OO principles for fast evolution • Enables design-space exploration • Application of OO methodology for synthesizing circuits • Flexibility through generic OO model with a common API • Adapt to new RA “retargetable compiler” • Produce circuits from HL pure OO code: Smalltalk

  11. Madeo: Global Flow Application Target Architecture Description Smalltalk Method Instantiation Abstract Model Madeo Synthesis Tools Netlist Concrete Architecture Place&Route Configuration (bitstream)

  12. A complete implementation sad4p1: p1 p2: p2 | sub0a sub1a sub0b sub1b sub0 sub1 cond0 cond1 p10 p11 p20 p21 | p10 := p1. p11 := p1 bitShift: 8. p20 := p2. p21 := p2 bitShift: 8. sub0a := p10-p20. sub0b := p20-p10. cond0 := sub0a<0. sub0 := cond0 ifTrue:[sub0b] ifFalse:[sub0a]. sub1a := p11-p21. sub1b := p21-p11. cond1 := sub1a<0. sub1 := cond1 ifTrue:[sub1b] ifFalse:[sub1a]. ^sub0+sub1.

  13. The MADEO framework • Software-engineering concepts applied to logic synthesis on reconfigurable architectures • MADEO: extensive use of OO methodology • Modeling, generic tools through polymorphism • An HL synthesis flow for RSoC based on the MADEO approach with validation methodology • Multi-level simulation: from behavioral to hardware • Target modeling • Interfacing with third-party tools through code generation • Software-like debugging features embedded in hardware

  14. Outline • Overview of Reconfigurable Architectures • OO methodology for synthesis on RA • Simulation and testing methodology • Software-like debugging for RA • Conclusion

  15. Global Flow Smalltalk Method Components Framework CDFG High-level CDFG SoC Model Synthesis Low-level CDFG System Simulator Multi-Level Simulator Testing Export Global Simulation Debugging Netlist Iterations Back-end Tools System Behavior Gantt Diagram Interaction Diagram Application Behavior Waveform

  16. APPLICATION APPLICATION [Lagadec, ESUG08] CDFG Use Tool X CDFG design CDFG EXPRESS model Tool Y HLL CDFG API (Java)‏ Platypus tool CDFG instances (STEP files)‏ ENTITY HierarchicalNode SUBTYPE OF (Node); localVariables : LIST OF AbstractData; subOperators : LIST [1 : ?] OF Node; END_ENTITY; ENTITY AccumulatorNode SUBTYPE OF (HierarchicalNode); init : AbstractData; --”AccumulatorNode.init” the initial value we start accumulating from. toBeAccumulated: AbstractData; DERIVE cumulatedArguments : LIST OF AbstractData := subOperators [ SIZEOF (subOperators)].outputs; WHERE toBeAccumulatedSource: SIZEOF ( cumulatedArguments )=1; typeCompat: cumulatedArguments[1].type = init.type; END_ENTITY; Target architecture description Madeo+ synthesis tool CDFG Checker HLL CDFG API (Smalltalk)‏ Target 1 EDIF Target 2 C like code Target 3 Specific Assembly code 16

  17. Application Intermediate Representation • Hierarchical Nodes • structuring  process  sequencing  loop  conditional • Atomic Nodes • compute  constants  memory access communications/synchronizations

  18. Application refinement at RTL Level • Low-level CDFG • Inherited from the CDFG framework • Produced from high-level CDFG mapping • Bound to an architecture • Additional constructs for hardware level • Primitive operators linked to libraries • Registers/flip-flop • FSM description (KISS format) • Random logic (BLIF format) • Taken as input of: • Synthesis tool  EDIF generation • RTL-level simulator

  19. Link between abstraction-levels • How keeping the link between HL-CDFG variables and LL-CDFG signals? ? Synthesis   Software abstraction Implementation in hardware

  20. Link between abstraction-levels • HL variable linked to its LL bit vector 1:n HL Variable Signal bit vector

  21. Multi-Level Simulation Engines • Behavioral specification of the application: Smalltalk • Direct execution by ST virtual machine environment • Use of system-level simulator API in code • High-level CDFG produced from Smalltalk code • Each node is simulated in function of sequencing nodes • CDFG API for design pattern: Visitor, Composite • Low-Level CDFG • RTL-Level simulator takes as input a low-level CDFG • Link between HL and LL CDFG • For example loop indices • Tracing signals • Waveforms generation

  22. System Modeling Framework • Component approach • Hierarchical composition • Modularity and reusability • Component characteristics • Declaration and scheduling of encapsulated processes • Port interfaces for connections and communications between components • Local communications between processes through local channels Component #Main Component #Unit2 Component #Unit1 P1 P1 P3 P2 P2

  23. System Modeling Framework Abstraction Level • Component class hierarchy • Connection class hierarchy Component Inheritance relation User Class #Main User Class #Unit1 User Class #Unit2 Abstraction Level Connection FIFO Blocking Channel

  24. System-Level Simulation • Framework of classes • Based on an event-driven simulation kernel [Blue Book] • Defines an API for simulating operator latencies, scheduling, stopping activities • System modeling framework inherits from the simulator • Simulator + modeling class hierarchy SimulationObject Simulation Component Connection User Model

  25. Example • Case Study • Partial modeling of a reconfigurable system-on-chip • System activities: DAM transfers, synchronizations, etc. • Application accelerated on a RA CPU DMA Memory Bus Local Mem. Reconfigurable Accelerator

  26. System simulation • Interaction diagram between components • Behavior of the system and the application

  27. LL-CDFG simulation • Cycle-accurate simulation • Stimuli on LL-CDFG signal interface defined in a method of the accelerator component • Interface between the system and accelerated function • Tracing values for LL-CDFG simulation • Simulator defines an API to set probes on the LL-CDFG signal interface • Tracing of the signal values • Graph generation

  28. Tracing signals • Traced signals and stimuli set through a GUI

  29. LL-CDFG simulation • Traces produced from signals • Values tested against expected results: SUnit testing

  30. Testing methodology: SUnit • Unit test for synthesis result • Characterization test between two simulations test1 selfshouldnt:[CDFGSynthesisAPIexample1] raise:TestResult error test2 CDFGSynthesisAPInew example:'example.step' family:'F4' primitives:true. res := selfreadResult. CDFGSynthesisAPInew example:'example.step' family:'F4' primitives: false. res2 := selfreadResult. self assert: res = res2

  31. Validation with manufacturer tools Smalltalk Method High-level CDFG Synthesis Low-level CDFG Export Mainstream/proprietary simulation tools (cell library) Netlist Back-end Tools

  32. Interfacing with third party tools • In a classical hardware design flow system activities interacting with the application’s interface are modeled in a wrapper • An hardware engineer would do: • Wrapper is hand-written in HDL (VHDL, Verilog) Time-consuming and error prone • Very low abstraction level and specific  Need deep update for new application • Increasing productivity by scripting and generating HDL wrapper • Interfacing with mainstream HDL simulation tools Wrapper Application Interface

  33. Stand-Alone LL Simulation • Dependencies on signals used for interacting with the LL-CDFG • Possibility to script execution scenarios through the instantiation of dependency objects triggering actions • No hardware details (signal declarations, etc.) • Set of interactions between the system and the application defined by a set of dependencies • Dependencies ~ mock object

  34. Wrapper Generation Smalltalk Method HL-CDFG Synthesis Multi-level simulator LL-CDFG Simulation script (Mock object creation) Export Netlist Verilog Wrapper Verilog ModelSim Results

  35. Dependency Model • Stopping the simulation • Triggering a signal on change Simulator onChange: (Simulator synthesizedCDFG outputNamed: 'done') relation: '=' value: 1 depName: 'Task Done’ action: Simulator stop. Simulator onChange: dma_Ack_Read relation: '=' value: 1 depName: 'dma_ack_read' action: (SimulatorForceSignal forceSignal: (dma_Req_Read) to: 0 in: 10).

  36. Generated HDL (Verilog) • Stopping the simulation • Triggering a signal on change • Looks shorter but is missing: signal declarations, module declarations, interconnections and other LL details  ST coding + generation enable to save 50% of the designer’s coding effort initial begin @(posedge done); - - HALT $stop end always @(posedge dma_ack_read) begin #(PERIOD * 10) dma_ack_read = 0; end

  37. Simulation by third party tools • Link: signal/LUT names LL-CDFG HL-CDFG  Enables to go back to the highest abstraction level Modelsim (Mentor Graphics)

  38. Outline • Overview of Reconfigurable Architectures • OO methodology for synthesis on RA • Simulation and testing methodology • Software-like debugging for RA • Conclusion

  39. After Testing Failed • Multi-level simulation enables to test the application at any flow stage • Use software engineering techniques • Testing at all level with SUnit • Modeling approach with generic models • Platform , application, interactions • Interfacing with third-party tools • Automated code generation • If validation failed… • …Time for debugging Testing Debugging

  40. Debugging and exploration facilities • Example: Visualworks’ debugger

  41. Methods and Tools for Software Debugging • Debugging facilities in Smalltalk environment • Conditional breakpoint and watchpoint inserted/modified dynamically • Hot-code replacement • Deep exploration of the execution context • Message stack control • Short iterative cycles: edit-compile-run-debug • Fast development • These software features do not exist in hardware • No symbolic debugging, no execution stack, etc.

  42. Debugging Hardware • Common hardware debugging methodology for RA • Hardware simulation, embedded logic analyzer… • Powerful tools but debugging is performed at hardware level  Trade-off performance/complexity exposed to the designer Complexity Hardware Software ELA ModelSim HDL Trade-off SystemC Performance

  43. From Software to Hardware Debugging • Reconfigurable circuits can support the main advantages of software engineering methodology • A bridge between software and hardware world • Reconfigurability enables to re-used the circuit • Possibility to iterate on a design • edit-compile-run ~ edit-synthesize/configure-run • Synthesis is time-consuming • Debugging the application in-situ with a specific interface  Gain in performance

  44. Global Flow Smalltalk Method High-level CDFG Probe Insertion Synthesis Low-level CDFG Multi-Level Simulator Export Probed Netlist Reconfigurable Architecture

  45. Probing Hardware : Principles • From software to hardware probes • Watchpoints and breakpoints concepts • Controllability over hardware execution • Software debugger features added to hardware application • Benefit from reconfigurability • Debugging support automatically inserted by the design framework (probes + controller) • All debugging features removed once design is validated

  46. Probing signals • Breakpoints set through a GUI

  47. Embedding software debugger features • Execution is controlled by the debugger • Breakpoints interfaced with a debug controller Op Op Op Op Schedule controller Synthesis   Simulator Op Op Debug ctrler Op Op Control interface Control interface

  48. Hardwired Breakpoint • Freeze the execution when triggered • Limit on conditional operators Hierarchical low-level CDFG Top Hier1 Hier2 i1 Op O i2 = != < > Value OpSel Conditionnal breakpoint i1 OpN O i2 = != < > Value OpSel Conditionnal breakpoint Global OR Control Enable operators Local Controller Debugging Controller

  49. Hardwired Breakpoint • Configurable breakpoints • Pool of probed signals is static • Breakpoint condition are configurable and can be enabled/disabled  Possibility to speculate and to backtrack execution • No-need for re-synthesis • Configuration structure • 2-D vector • Configuration word: contains operator selection, activation status and arguments • Extraction of the debug information: two execution modes • Running mode • Debug mode • Execution control: step-by-step, resume • Read back of the debugging information

  50. Hardwired Watchpoint • Probed signals are wired to the top interface • Automatically crosses the hierarchies • Possibly conditional • Trace analysis Hierarchical low-level CDFG Top Hier1 Hier2 Probed signal Op

More Related