Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Dominik Töllner
dblp:351/5771
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021
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.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Programming languages and type systems · 100% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Processor architecture and microarchitecture · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Programming languages and type systems › interoperability
binary compatibility |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | MELF: Multivariant Executables for a Heterogeneous World · USENIX ATC 2023 |
Processor architecture and microarchitecture
instruction set architecture |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | MELF: Multivariant Executables for a Heterogeneous World · USENIX ATC 2023 |
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Analyzing the memory ordering models of the Apple M1abstractThe Apple M1 ARM processor family incorporates two memory consistency models: the conventional ARM weak memory ordering and the Total store ordering (TSO) model from the x86 architecture utilized by Apple’s x86 emulator, Rosetta 2. The presence of both memory ordering models on the same hardware enables us to thoroughly benchmark and compare their performance characteristics and worst-case workloads. In this paper, we assess the performance implications of TSO on the Apple M1 processor architecture. Based on the multi-threading workloads of the SPEC2017 CPU FP benchmark suite, our findings indicate that TSO is, on average, 8.94 percent slower than ARM’s weaker memory ordering. Through synthetic benchmarks, we further explore the workloads that experience the most significant performance degradation due to TSO. We also take a deeper look into the specific atomic instructions provided by the ARMv8.3 specification and their synchronization overheads. Lars Wrenger, Dominik Töllner, Daniel Lohmann |
J. Syst. Archit. | 2 |
| 2023 | MELF: Multivariant Executables for a Heterogeneous World
Dominik Töllner, Christian Dietrich 0001, Illia Ostapyshyn, Florian Rommel, Daniel Lohmann |
USENIX ATC | 1 |