RECORD
Performance and Energy Trade-Offs for Parallel Applications on Heterogeneous Multi-Processing Systems
Systems and Control · Submitted 6 May 2020
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim Energy savings of up to 59.77%, 61.38% and 17.7% were observed when compared to the performance, ondemand and powersave Linux governors, respectively, with higher or similar performance.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
This work proposes a methodology to find performance and energy trade-offs for parallel applications running on Heterogeneous Multi-Processing systems with a single instruction-set architecture. These offer flexibility in the form of different core types and voltage and frequency pairings, defining a vast design space to explore. Therefore, for a given application, choosing a configuration that optimizes the performance and energy consumption is not straightforward. Our method proposes novel analytical models for performance and power consumption whose parameters can be fitted using only a few strategically sampled offline measurements. These models are then used to estimate an application's performance and energy consumption for the whole configuration space. In turn, these offline predictions define the choice of estimated Pareto-optimal configurations of the model, which are used to inform the selection of the configuration that the application should be executed on. The methodology was validated on an ODROID-XU3 board for eight programs from the PARSEC Benchmark, Phoronix Test Suite and Rodinia applications. The generated Pareto-optimal configuration space represented a 99% reduction of the universe of all available configurations. Energy savings of up to 59.77%, 61.38% and 17.7% were observed when compared to the performance, ondemand and powersave Linux governors, respectively, with higher or similar performance.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | This work proposes a methodology to find performance and energy trade-offs for parallel applications running on Heterogeneous Multi-Processing systems with a single instruction-set architecture. | contribution 1.00 | 0.86 | 0.09 | asserted 0.99 |
| s1 | These offer flexibility in the form of different core types and voltage and frequency pairings, defining a vast design space to explore. | background 1.00 | 0.09 | 0.03 | asserted 0.99 |
| s2 | Therefore, for a given application, choosing a configuration that optimizes the performance and energy consumption is not straightforward. | background 0.87 | 0.11 | 0.03 | asserted 0.99 |
| s3 | Our method proposes novel analytical models for performance and power consumption whose parameters can be fitted using only a few strategically sampled offline measurements. | method 0.65 | 0.94 | 0.08 | asserted 1.00 |
| s4 | These models are then used to estimate an application's performance and energy consumption for the whole configuration space. | method 0.99 | 0.88 | 0.07 | asserted 1.00 |
| s5 | In turn, these offline predictions define the choice of estimated Pareto-optimal configurations of the model, which are used to inform the selection of the configuration that the application should be executed on. | method 0.98 | 0.84 | 0.15 | asserted 1.00 |
| s6 | The methodology was validated on an ODROID-XU3 board for eight programs from the PARSEC Benchmark, Phoronix Test Suite and Rodinia applications. | method 0.88 | 0.95 | 0.04 | asserted 1.00 |
| s7 | The generated Pareto-optimal configuration space represented a 99% reduction of the universe of all available configurations. | result 1.00 | 0.94 | 0.15 | asserted 1.00 |
| s8 | Energy savings of up to 59.77%, 61.38% and 17.7% were observed when compared to the performance, ondemand and powersave Linux governors, respectively, with higher or similar performance. | result 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.60 | asserted 1.00 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v1
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
This work proposes a methodology to find performance and energy trade-offs for parallel applications running on Heterogeneous Multi-Processing systems with a single instruction-set architecture. These offer flexibility in the form of different core types and voltage and frequency pairings, defining a vast design space to explore. Therefore, for a given application, choosing a configuration that optimizes the performance and energy consumption is not straightforward. Our method proposes novel analytical models for performance and power consumption whose parameters can be fitted using only a few strategically sampled offline measurements. These models are then used to estimate an application's performance and energy consumption for the whole configuration space. In turn, these offline predictions define the choice of estimated Pareto-optimal configurations of the model, which are used to inform the selection of the configuration that the application should be executed on. The methodology was validated on an ODROID-XU3 board for eight programs from the PARSEC Benchmark, Phoronix Test Suite and Rodinia applications. The generated Pareto-optimal configuration space represented a 99% reduction of the universe of all available configurations. Energy savings of up to 59.77%, 61.38% and 17.7% were observed when compared to the performance, ondemand and powersave Linux governors, respectively, with higher or similar performance.
Human review
How the literature uses it
What this paper does with the arXiv papers it cites
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.