1 / 7

Overview of reports

Overview of reports . Adam Leko HCS Research Laboratory University of Florida. Programming report overview (report form). Report on programming CAMEL Description of benchmark Overview of code Comparison of UPC code with MPI Bench9 Description of benchmark Overview of code

trent
Download Presentation

Overview of reports

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. Overview of reports Adam Leko HCS Research Laboratory University of Florida

  2. Programming report overview (report form) • Report on programming • CAMEL • Description of benchmark • Overview of code • Comparison of UPC code with MPI • Bench9 • Description of benchmark • Overview of code • Comparison of UPC code with MPI and SHMEM • Discussion of the effect of different optimizations on code • Convolution • Description of benchmark • Overview of code • Comparison of UPC code with MPI and SHMEM • Discussion of the effect of different optimizations on code

  3. Report on Paradyn (slideset) • Overview of Paradyn • Description of instrumentation overview • Paradyn architecture overview • Dynamic instrumentation overview • Description of metrics and visualizations • PCL & MDL configuration files • Overview of W3 search model (why, where, when) & performance consulatant • Continuation of description based on site visit slides • Demo • Show performance consultant/W3 on sequential and MPI program • Evaluation of Paradyn & discussion • Finish evaluation from the site visit slides • Current limitations/caveats • What problems we might encounter if we try to adapt for SHMEM and UPC

  4. Report on performance modeling • Paper outline • Abstract & Introduction • Overview of performance models • Reasons for examining performance models in the design of a PAT • Get a list of performance factors • Performance models can guide a PAT in giving advice or identifying bottlenecks • Overview & analysis of current performance models • Formal performance models • Petri nets & process algebras • Quick description; not a detailed discussion since formal performance models aren’t very useful for a PAT • Analytical performance models • Meant to give programmer “mental picture” of programming environment (LogP & variants, BSP, etc) • Predictive performance models • Meant to predict performance of actual applications on a range of architectures • Probably the most useful to us • For each performance model, • Give list of performance factors used to characterize model • Report accuracy for each model • Conclusion & recommendations • Give recommendation on how to best use a performance model in the context of our PAT

  5. Performance model papers • Formal models • “Software Performance Modeling using PEPA nets,” S. Gilmore et all. • Analytical models • “Parallelism in Random Access Machines,” S. Fortune and J. Wyllie. • “LogP: Towards a Realistic Model of Parallel Computation,” Culler et all. • “A Bridging Model for Parallel Computation,” L. Valiant. • Related paper: “Using the BSP Cost Model for Optimal Parallel Neural Network Training,” R. Rogers and D. Skillicorn. • Related paper: “Theory, practice, and a tool for BSP performance prediction,” J. Hill et all. • “Modeling Performance of Parallel Programs,” W. Meira, Jr. [tech report on lost cycles analysis] • Related paper: “Parallel Performance Prediction Using Lost Cycles Analysis,” M. Crovella and T. LeBlanc. • Predictive models • “A Static Parameter based Performance Prediction Tool for Parallel Programs,” T. Fahringer and H. Zima. • “A Framework for Performance Modeling and Prection,” A. Snaveley et all. • “Predicting and Evaluating Distributed Communication Performance,” K. Cameron and R. Ge. • “PerPreT – A Performance Prediction Tool for Massively Parallel Systems,” J. Brehm. • “PACE: A Toolset to Investigate and Predict Performance in Parallel Systems,” D. Kerbyson et all. • Related paper: “Is Predictive Tracing Too Late for HPC Users?” D. Kerbyson et all. • “An Effective and Practical Performance Prediction Model for Parallel Computing on Non-dedicated Heterogeneous NOW,” Y. Yan and X. Zhang. • “Parametric Micro-level Performance Models for Parallel Computing,” Y. Kim et all. • “Estimating and Optimizing Performance for Parallel Programs,” T. Fahringer. • Related paper: “Automatic Performance Prediction to Support Parallelization of Fortran Programs for Massively Parallel Systems,” T. Fahringer et all. • Related paper: “Hierarchical Performance Prediction for Parallel Programs,” R. Blasko.

  6. Performance model papers • Predictive models, continued • “Compiling Performance Models from Parallel Programs,” A. van Gemund. • Related paper: “Performance Prediction of Parallel Processing Systems: The PAMELA Methodology,” A. van Gemund. • “Analytical Performance Prediction on Multicomputers,” M. Clement. • “Studying the Performance Properties of Concurrent Programs by Simulation Experiments on Synthetic Programs,” R. Candlin. • “Performance Prediction of Large Parallel Applications Using Parallel Simualtions,” R. Bagrodia et all. • “Predictive Performance and Scalability Modeling of a Large-Scale Application,” D. Kerbyson et all. • “Parallel Program Performance Prediction Using Deterministic Task Graph Analysis,” V. Adve. • Related paper: “Analyzing the Behavior and Performance of Parallel Programs, “ V. Adve. • “Execution-Driven Tools for Parallel Simulation of Parallel Architectures and Applications,” D. Poulsen and R. Yew. • “Analytical Performance Prediction on Multicomputers,” M. Clement and M. Quinn. • “A Performance Evaluation of Cluster-based Architectures,” X. Qin and J. Baer. • “A Source Code Analyzer for Performance Prediction,” M. Kuhnemann et all. • “Interpretive Performance Prediction for High Performance Application Development,” M. Parashar and S. Hariri. • Related paper: “Compile-Time Performance Prediction of HPF/Fortran 90D,” M. Parashar and S. Hariri. • “Performance Prediction: A Case Study Using a Scalable Shared-Virtual-Memory Machine,” X. Sun and J. Zhu. • “Accurate Performance Prediction for Massively Parallel Systems and its Applications,” J. Simon and J. Wierum. • “A Performance Modeling System for Message-Passing Parallel Programs,” D. Grove and P. Coddington. • Related paper: “Performance Modeling of Message-Passing Parallel Programs,” D. Grove (PhD thesis). • Approaches to parallel performance prediction,” F. Howell (PhD thesis). • Related paper: “Reverse Profiling,” F. Howell.

  7. Report on compiler optimizations • Paper outline • Abstract & Introduction • Overview of compiler optimizations • Reasons for examining compiler optimizations • Get a list of performance factors • Compiler optimizations can affect performance in positive or negative ways, so its important to • Overview & analysis of compiler optimizations • Concentrate on compiler optimizations directed at parallel programs (High-Performance Fortran) • Conclusion & recommendations • Give recommendation on how to best use a performance model in the context of our PAT • Future work (next semester) • Examine sequential compiler optimizations • Examine algorithm optimization techniques

More Related