Generation, Validation and Analysis of SPEC CPU2006 Simulation Points Based on Branch, Memory and TLB Characteristics | SpringerLink
Skip to main content

Generation, Validation and Analysis of SPEC CPU2006 Simulation Points Based on Branch, Memory and TLB Characteristics

  • Conference paper
Computer Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking (SBW 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 5419))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The SPEC CPU2006 suite, released in Aug 2006 is the current industry-standard, CPU-intensive benchmark suite, created from a collection of popular modern workloads. But, these workloads take machine weeks to months of time when fed to cycle accurate simulators and have widely varying behavior even over large scales of time [1]. It is to be noted that we do not see simulation based papers using SPEC CPU2006 even after 1.5 years of its release. A well known technique to solve this problem is the use of simulation points [2]. We have generated the simulation points for SPEC CPU2006 and made it available at [3]. We also report the accuracies of these simulation points based on the CPI, branch misspredictions, cache & TLB miss ratios by comparing with the full runs for a subset of the benchmarks. It is to be noted that the simulation points were only used for cache, branch and CPI studies until now and this is the first attempt towards validating them for TLB studies. They have also been found to be equally representative in depicting the TLB characteristics. Using the generated simulation points, we provide an analysis of the behavior of the workloads in the suite for different branch predictor & cache configurations and report the optimally performing configurations. The simulations for the different TLB configurations revealed that usage of large page sizes significantly reduce the translation misses and aid in improving the overall CPI of the modern workloads.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sherwood, T., Calder, B.: Time varying behavior of programs. Technical Report UCSD-CS99-630, UC San Diego, (August 1999)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sherwood, T., Perelman, E., Hamerly, G., Calder, B.: Automatically characterizing large scale program behavior. In: ASPLOS (October 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. http://www.freewebs.com/gkofwarf/simpoints.htm

  4. SPEC. Standard performance evaluation corporation, http://www.spec.org

  5. Henning, J.L.: SPEC CPU 2000: Measuring cpu performance in the new millennium. IEEE Computer 33(7), 28–35 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Charney, M.J., Puzak, T.R.: Prefetching and memory system behavior of the SPEC95 benchmark suite. IBM Journal of Research and Development 41(3) (May 1997)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Haskins, J., Skadron, K.: Minimal subset evaluation: warmup for simulated hardware state. In: Proceedings of the 2001 International Conference on Computer Design (September 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Phansalkar, A., Joshi, A., John, L.K.: Analysis of redundancy and application balance in the SPEC CPU 2006 benchmark suite. In: The 34th International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA) (June 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hamerly, G., Perelman, E., Lau, J., Calder, B.: Simpoint 3.0: Faster and more flexible program analysis. In: Workshop on Modeling, Benchmarking and Simulation (June 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hamerly, G., Perelman, E., Calder, B.: How to use simpoint to pick simulation points. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review (March 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Perelman, E., Hamerly, G., Calder, B.: Picking statistically valid and early simulation points. In: International Conference on Parallel Architectures and Compilation Techniques (September 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Yeh, T.-Y., Patt, Y.N.: Alternative implementations of two-level adaptive branch prediction. In: 19th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (May 1992)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lau, J., Sampson, J., Perelman, E., Hamerly, G., Calder, B.: The strong correlation between code signatures and performance. In: IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software (March 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Perelman, E., Sherwood, T., Calder, B.: Basic block distribution analysis to find periodic behavior and simulation points in applications. In: International Conference on Parallel Architectures and Compilation Techniques (September 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kongetira, P., Aingaran, K., Olukotun, K.: Niagara: A 32-way multithreaded sparc processor. MICRO 25(2), 21–29 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Korn, W., Chang, M.S.: SPEC CPU 2006 sensitivity to memory page sizes. ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News (March 2007)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ganesan, K., Panwar, D., John, L.K. (2009). Generation, Validation and Analysis of SPEC CPU2006 Simulation Points Based on Branch, Memory and TLB Characteristics. In: Kaeli, D., Sachs, K. (eds) Computer Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking. SBW 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5419. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-93799-9_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-93799-9_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-93798-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-93799-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics