Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Michelle J. Moravan
dblp:80/5513
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2006
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 1 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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 |
Parallel and multicore computing · 46% Memory systems · 43% Distributed systems · 11% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Programming languages and type systems · 100% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Memory systems
cache coherence |
0.1 | 2 | 2006 | LogTM: log-based transactional memory · HPCA 2006 Supporting nested transactional memory in logTM · ASPLOS 2006 |
Parallel and multicore computing › transactional memory
conflict detection |
0.1 | 2 | 2006 | LogTM: log-based transactional memory · HPCA 2006 Supporting nested transactional memory in logTM · ASPLOS 2006 |
Parallel and multicore computing
transactional memory |
0.1 | 2 | 2006 | LogTM: log-based transactional memory · HPCA 2006 Supporting nested transactional memory in logTM · ASPLOS 2006 |
Memory systems › cache coherence
directory-based coherence |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | LogTM: log-based transactional memory · HPCA 2006 |
Memory systems › cache coherence › cache coherence protocol
MOESI |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | LogTM: log-based transactional memory · HPCA 2006 |
Distributed systems › transaction processing
nested transactions |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | Supporting nested transactional memory in logTM · ASPLOS 2006 |
Programming languages and type systems › module systems
software composition |
0.0 | 1 | 2006 | Supporting nested transactional memory in logTM · ASPLOS 2006 |
Parallel and multicore computing
parallel programming models |
0.0 | 1 | 2006 | LogTM: log-based transactional memory · HPCA 2006 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
log-based transactional memory · 0.1escape actions · 0.1version management · 0.1lazy cleanup · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | Supporting nested transactional memory in logTMabstractNested transactional memory (TM) facilitates software composition by letting one module invoke another without either knowing whether the other uses transactions. Closed nested transactions extend isolation of an inner transaction until the toplevel transaction commits. Implementations may flatten nested transactions into the top-level one, resulting in a complete abort on conflict, or allow partial abort of inner transactions. Open nested transactions allow a committing inner transaction to immediately release isolation, which increases parallelism and expressiveness at the cost of both software and hardware complexity.This paper extends the recently-proposed flat Log-based Transactional Memory (LogTM) with nested transactions. Flat LogTM saves pre-transaction values in a log, detects conflicts with read (R) and write (W) bits per cache block, and, on abort, invokes a software handler to unroll the log. Nested LogTM supports nesting by segmenting the log into a stack of activation records and modestly replicating R/W bits. To facilitate composition with nontransactional code, such as language runtime and operating system services, we propose escape actions that allow trusted code to run outside the confines of the transactional memory system. Michelle J. Moravan, Jayaram Bobba, Kevin E. Moore, Luke Yen, Mark D. Hill, Ben Liblit, Michael M. Swift, David A. Wood 0001 |
ASPLOS | 1 |
| 2006 | LogTM: log-based transactional memoryabstractTransactional memory (TM) simplifies parallel programming by guaranteeing that transactions appear to execute atomically and in isolation. Implementing these properties includes providing data version management for the simultaneous storage of both new (visible if the transaction commits) and old (retained if the transaction aborts) values. Most (hardware) TM systems leave old values "in place" (the target memory address) and buffer new values elsewhere until commit. This makes aborts fast, but penalizes (the much more frequent) commits. In this paper, we present a new implementation of transactional memory, log-based transactional memory (LogTM), that makes commits fast by storing old values to a per-thread log in cacheable virtual memory and storing new values in place. LogTM makes two additional contributions. First, LogTM extends a MOESI directory protocol to enable both fast conflict detection on evicted blocks and fast commit (using lazy cleanup). Second, LogTM handles aborts in (library) software with little performance penalty. Evaluations running micro- and SPLASH-2 benchmarks on a 32-way multiprocessor support our decision to optimize for commit by showing that only 1-2% of transactions abort. Kevin E. Moore, Jayaram Bobba, Michelle J. Moravan, Mark D. Hill, David A. Wood 0001 |
HPCA | 3 |