Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Will Denissen

dblp:27/5631 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2002
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 4 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Parallel and multicore computing · 87% Distributed systems · 13%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Compilers and program optimization · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel programming models
data-parallel language
0.011996
An Implementation Framework for HPF Distributed Arrays on Message-Passing Parallel Computer Systems · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 1996
Parallel and multicore computing
parallel programming models
0.011996
An Implementation Framework for HPF Distributed Arrays on Message-Passing Parallel Computer Systems · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 1996
Distributed systems › operating system support › interprocess communication
message-passing systems
0.011996
An Implementation Framework for HPF Distributed Arrays on Message-Passing Parallel Computer Systems · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 1996

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

ownership test transformation · 0.0local index enumeration · 0.0block-cyclic distribution · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2002 Finding performance bugs with the TNO HPF benchmark suite
abstract
Abstract High‐Performance Fortran (HPF) has been designed to provide portable performance on distributed memory machines. An important aspect of portable performance is the behavior of the available HPF compilers. Ideally, a programmer may expect comparable performance between different HPF compilers, given the same program and the same machine. To test the performance portability between compilers, we have designed a special benchmark suite, called the TNO HPF benchmark suite. It consists of a set of HPF programs that test various aspects of efficient parallel code generation. The benchmark suite consists of a number of template programs that are used to generate test programs with different array sizes, alignments, distributions, and iteration spaces. It ranges from very simple assignments to more complex assignments such as triangular iteration spaces, convex iteration spaces, coupled subscripts, and indirection arrays. We have run the TNO HPF benchmark suite on three compilers: the PREPARE prototype compiler, the PGI‐HPF compiler, and the GMD Adaptor HPF compiler. Results show performance differences that can be quite large (up to two orders of magnitude for the same test program). Closer inspection reveals that the origin of most of the differences in performance is due to differences in local enumeration and storage of distributed array elements. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Will Denissen, Henk J. Sips
Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp.1
1998 Analysis of Local Enumeration and Storage Schemes in HPF
Henk J. Sips, Will Denissen, Kees van Reeuwijk
Parallel Comput.2
1996 Analysis of Local Enumeration and Storage Schemes in HPF
abstract
In this paper, we analyze the efficiency of three local enumeration and three storage compression schemes for cyclic(m) data distributions in High Performance Fortran (HPF).We show that for linear array access sequences, efficient enumeration and storage compression schemes can be derived.Furthermore, local enumeration and storage techniques are shown to be orthogonal, if the local storage compression scheme is collapsible.Performance figures of the methods are given for a number of different processors.
Henk J. Sips, Kees van Reeuwijk, Will Denissen
International Conference on Supercomputing3
1996 An Implementation Framework for HPF Distributed Arrays on Message-Passing Parallel Computer Systems
abstract
Data parallel languages, like High Performance Fortran (HPF), support the notion of distributed arrays. However, the implementation of such distributed array structures and their access on message passing computers is not straightforward. This holds especially for distributed arrays that are aligned to each other and given a block-cyclic distribution. In this paper, an implementation framework is presented for HPF distributed arrays on message passing computers. Methods are presented for efficient (in space and time) local index enumeration, local storage, and communication. Techniques for local set enumeration provide the basis for constructing local iteration sets and communication sets. It is shown that both local set enumeration and local storage schemes can be derived from the same equation. Local set enumeration and local storage schemes are shown to be orthogonal, i.e., they can be freely combined. Moreover, for linear access sequences generated by our enumeration methods, the local address calculations can be moved out of the enumeration loop, yielding efficient local memory address generation. The local set enumeration methods are implemented by using a relatively simple general transformation rule for absorbing ownership tests. This transformation rule can be repeatedly applied to absorb multiple ownership tests. Performance figures are presented for local iteration overhead, a simple communication pattern, and storage efficiency.
Kees van Reeuwijk, Will Denissen, Henk J. Sips, Edwin M. R. M. Paalvast
IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst.2