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

Robert D. Arnold

dblp:05/4309 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1999
0000-0001-6143-3991ORCID · corroborated

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

Systems, architecture and hardware · 1Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 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
2 papers
Embedded and real-time systems · 38% Electronic design automation · 34% Memory systems · 20%

Topics — the 10 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Electronic design automation
timing analysis
0.021999
Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance · IEEE Trans. Computers 1999
Bounding Worst-Case Instruction Cache Performance · RTSS 1994
Embedded and real-time systems
worst-case execution time analysis
0.021999
Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance · IEEE Trans. Computers 1999
Bounding Worst-Case Instruction Cache Performance · RTSS 1994
Electronic design automation › timing analysis
pipeline and cache timing analysis
0.011999
Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance · IEEE Trans. Computers 1999
Embedded and real-time systems
real-time scheduling
0.011999
Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance · IEEE Trans. Computers 1999
Memory systems
cache
0.021999
Bounding Worst-Case Instruction Cache Performance · RTSS 1994
Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance · IEEE Trans. Computers 1999
Memory systems › cache › CPU cache
instruction cache
0.021999
Bounding Worst-Case Instruction Cache Performance · RTSS 1994
Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance · IEEE Trans. Computers 1999
Embedded and real-time systems › worst-case execution time analysis
instruction cache analysis
0.011994
Bounding Worst-Case Instruction Cache Performance · RTSS 1994
Processor architecture and microarchitecture › pipelining
pipeline hazard
0.011999
Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance · IEEE Trans. Computers 1999
Processor architecture and microarchitecture
pipelining
0.011999
Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance · IEEE Trans. Computers 1999
Electronic design automation › timing analysis
static timing analysis
0.011994
Bounding Worst-Case Instruction Cache Performance · RTSS 1994

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

control flow analysis · 0.0static program analysis · 0.0static cache simulation · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1999 Timing Constraint Specification and Analysis
abstract
Real-time programmers have to deal with the problem of relating timing constraints associated with source code to sequences of machine instructions. This paper describes an environment to assist users in the specification and analysis of timing constraints. A timing analyzer predicts the best and worst case bounds for these constrained portions of code. A user interface for this timing analyzer was developed to depict whether these constraints were violated or met. A user is allowed to specify timing constraints within the source code of a C program. The user interface also provides three different methods for interactively selecting portions of programs. After each selection the corresponding bounded times, source code lines, and machine instructions are automatically displayed. Users are prevented from only selecting portions of the program for which timing bounds cannot be obtained. In addition, a technique is presented that allows the timing analysis to scale efficiently with complex functions and loops. The result is a user-friendly environment that supports the user specification and analysis of timing constraints at a high (source code) level and retains the accuracy of low (machine code) level analysis. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Lo Ko, Naghan Al-Yaqoubi, Christopher A. Healy, Emily Ratliff, Robert D. Arnold, David B. Whalley, Marion G. Harmon
Softw. Pract. Exp.5
1999 Bounding Pipeline and Instruction Cache Performance
abstract
Predicting the execution time of code segments in real-time systems is challenging. Most recently designed machines contain pipelines and caches. Pipeline hazards may result in multicycle delays. Instruction or data memory references may not be found in cache and these misses typically require several cycles to resolve. Whether an instruction will stall due to a pipeline hazard or a cache miss depends on the dynamic sequence of previous instructions executed and memory references performed. Furthermore, these penalties are not independent since delays due to pipeline stalls and cache miss penalties may overlap. This paper describes an approach for bounding the worst and best case performance of large code segments on machines that exploit both pipelining and instruction caching. First, a method is used to analyze a program's control flow to statically categorize the caching behavior of each instruction. Next, these categorizations are used in the pipeline analysis of sequences of instructions representing paths within the program. A timing analyzer uses the pipeline path analysis to estimate the worst and best-case execution performance of each loop and function in the program. Finally, a graphical user interface is invoked that allows a user to request timing predictions on portions of the program. The results indicate that the timing analyzer efficiently produces tight predictions of worst and best-case performance for pipelining and instruction caching.
Christopher A. Healy, Robert D. Arnold, Frank Mueller 0001, David B. Whalley, Marion G. Harmon
IEEE Trans. Computers2
1994 Bounding Worst-Case Instruction Cache Performance
abstract
The use of caches poses a difficult tradeoff for architects of real-time systems. While caches provide significant performance advantages, they have also been viewed as inherently unpredictable, since the behavior of a cache reference depends upon the history of the previous references. The use of caches is only suitable for real-time systems if a reasonably tight bound on the performance of programs using cache memory can be predicted. This paper describes an approach for bounding the worst-case instruction cache performance of large code segments. First, a new method called static cache simulation is used to analyze a program's control flow to statically categorize the caching behavior of each instruction. A timing analyzer, which uses the categorization information, then estimates the worst-case instruction cache performance for each loop and function in the program.>
Robert D. Arnold, Frank Mueller 0001, David B. Whalley, Marion G. Harmon
RTSS1