2014
DOI: 10.1145/2584654
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Unified WCET analysis framework for multicore platforms

Abstract: Abstract-With the advent of multi-core architectures, worst case execution time (WCET) analysis has become an increasingly difficult problem. In this paper, we propose a unified WCET analysis framework for multi-core processors featuring both shared cache and shared bus. Compared to other previous works, our work differs by modeling the interaction of shared cache and shared bus with other basic micro-architectural components (e.g. pipeline and branch predictor). In addition, our framework does not assume a ti… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Most analyses consider multi-core systems with a simple bus providing access to a single shared memory [9], [10], [11], [12]. However, contention analysis of clustered many-core platforms has also been explored, as in [13], [14], [15], [16], where the former two are the most relevant for this work, as they focus on Kalray MPPA-256, which is the platform considered in this paper.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most analyses consider multi-core systems with a simple bus providing access to a single shared memory [9], [10], [11], [12]. However, contention analysis of clustered many-core platforms has also been explored, as in [13], [14], [15], [16], where the former two are the most relevant for this work, as they focus on Kalray MPPA-256, which is the platform considered in this paper.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each of the buffers has a capacity of b C flits on the C-NoC, and b D flits on the D-NoC. In contrast to most NoC implementations, links on the KalrayNoC do not have a flow control mechanism [9], [28]. This means a buffer can potentially overflow if more flits arrive than depart over a certain time period.…”
Section: B Switching Mechanism On the Nocmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly to our work, most analyses consider multi-core systems with a bus providing access to a shared memory with a single port (Schliecker et al 2010;Schliecker and Ernst 2011;Pellizzoni et al 2010;Dasari et al 2011;Dasari and Nelis 2012;Chattopadhyay et al 2014;Rodrigues et al 2013). However, these works are quite different with respect to the considered task models and scheduling policies for both the tasks themselves and their memory requests.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing work addresses the problem of deriving upper bounds on memory bus contention, but the analysis is tightly coupled to a particular arbitration policy, such as TDM (Rosén et al2007;Chattopadhyay et al 2010Chattopadhyay et al , 2014Kelter et al 2011;Schranzhofer et al , 2011 or non-specified work-conserving arbiters (Dasari et al 2011;Schliecker et al 2010), and a generic framework to handle different arbitration mechanisms does not exist. As a result, a change of memory arbiter currently implies adopting a new analysis with different inputs and assumptions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%