学术界和工业界的模拟差异:一个分支预测案例研究

G. Loh
{"title":"学术界和工业界的模拟差异:一个分支预测案例研究","authors":"G. Loh","doi":"10.1109/ISPASS.2005.1430556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Computer architecture research in academia and industry is heavily reliant on simulation studies. While microprocessor companies have the resources to develop highly detailed simulation infrastructures that they correlate against their own silicon, academic researchers tend to use free, widely available simulators. The differences in instruction set architectures, operating systems, simulator models and benchmarks create disconnect between academic and industrial research studies. This paper presents a comparative study to find correlations and differences between the same microarchitecture studies conducted in two different frameworks. Due to the limited availability of industrial simulation frameworks, this research is limited to a case study of branch predictors. Encouragingly, our simulations indicate that several recently proposed branch predictors behave similarly in both environments when evaluated with the SPEC CPU benchmark suite. Unfortunately, we also present results that show that conclusions drawn from studies based on SPEC CPU do not necessarily hold when other applications are considered","PeriodicalId":230669,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software, 2005. ISPASS 2005.","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simulation Differences Between Academia and Industry: A Branch Prediction Case Study\",\"authors\":\"G. Loh\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ISPASS.2005.1430556\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Computer architecture research in academia and industry is heavily reliant on simulation studies. While microprocessor companies have the resources to develop highly detailed simulation infrastructures that they correlate against their own silicon, academic researchers tend to use free, widely available simulators. The differences in instruction set architectures, operating systems, simulator models and benchmarks create disconnect between academic and industrial research studies. This paper presents a comparative study to find correlations and differences between the same microarchitecture studies conducted in two different frameworks. Due to the limited availability of industrial simulation frameworks, this research is limited to a case study of branch predictors. Encouragingly, our simulations indicate that several recently proposed branch predictors behave similarly in both environments when evaluated with the SPEC CPU benchmark suite. Unfortunately, we also present results that show that conclusions drawn from studies based on SPEC CPU do not necessarily hold when other applications are considered\",\"PeriodicalId\":230669,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software, 2005. ISPASS 2005.\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software, 2005. ISPASS 2005.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISPASS.2005.1430556\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software, 2005. ISPASS 2005.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISPASS.2005.1430556","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

学术界和工业界的计算机体系结构研究在很大程度上依赖于仿真研究。虽然微处理器公司有资源开发非常详细的模拟基础设施,并将其与自己的芯片相关联,但学术研究人员倾向于使用免费的、广泛可用的模拟器。指令集架构、操作系统、模拟器模型和基准的差异造成了学术研究和工业研究之间的脱节。本文提出了一项比较研究,以发现在两种不同框架下进行的相同微架构研究之间的相关性和差异。由于工业模拟框架的可用性有限,本研究仅限于分支预测器的案例研究。令人鼓舞的是,我们的模拟表明,当使用SPEC CPU基准套件进行评估时,最近提出的几个分支预测器在两个环境中的行为相似。不幸的是,我们还提出的结果表明,当考虑其他应用程序时,基于SPEC CPU的研究得出的结论不一定成立
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Simulation Differences Between Academia and Industry: A Branch Prediction Case Study
Computer architecture research in academia and industry is heavily reliant on simulation studies. While microprocessor companies have the resources to develop highly detailed simulation infrastructures that they correlate against their own silicon, academic researchers tend to use free, widely available simulators. The differences in instruction set architectures, operating systems, simulator models and benchmarks create disconnect between academic and industrial research studies. This paper presents a comparative study to find correlations and differences between the same microarchitecture studies conducted in two different frameworks. Due to the limited availability of industrial simulation frameworks, this research is limited to a case study of branch predictors. Encouragingly, our simulations indicate that several recently proposed branch predictors behave similarly in both environments when evaluated with the SPEC CPU benchmark suite. Unfortunately, we also present results that show that conclusions drawn from studies based on SPEC CPU do not necessarily hold when other applications are considered
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信