Fast and accurate branch predictor simulation
Pages 317 - 320
Abstract
The complexity of embedded processors has raised dramatically, due to the addition of architectural add-ons which improve performances significantly. High level models used in system simulation usually ignore these additions as the major issue is functional correctness. However, accurate estimates of software execution is sometimes required, therefore we focus in this paper on one of theses architectural features, the branch predictor. Unfortunately, advanced branch predictors use large tables, so that models directly implementing these schemes slow down simulation dramatically. To limit the simulation overhead, we define a modeling approach that we demonstrate on a state of the art predictor. We implemented the model in a dynamic binary translation based instruction set simulator and measured an accuracy of prediction of about 95% for a run-time overhead of less than 5%.
References
[1]
C.-K. Lo, L.-C. Chen, M.-H. Wu, and R.-S. Tsay, "Cycle-count-accurate processor modeling for fast and accurate system-level simulation," in Proceedings of Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition, March 2011.
[2]
A. Seznec and P. Michaud, "A case for (partially) tagged geometric history length branch prediction," Journal of Instruction-Level Parallelism, vol. 8, february 2006.
[3]
S. McFarling, "Combining branch predictors," Technical Report TN-36, Digital Western Research Laboratory, Tech. Rep., 1993.
[4]
G. H. Loh, D. S. Henry, and A. Krishnamurthy, "Exploiting bias in the hysteresis bit of 2-bit saturating counters in branch predictors," Journal of Instruction-Level Parallelism, vol. 5, March 2003.
[5]
P. Michaud, "A ppm-like, tag-based branch predictor," Journal of Instruction-Level Parallelism, vol. 7, April 2005.
[6]
R. Wilhelm, J. Engblom, A. Ermedahl, N. Holsti, S. Thesing, D. Whalley, G. Bernat, C. Ferdinand, R. old Heckmann, T. Mitra, F. Mueller, I. Puaut, P. Puschner, J. S. lat, and P. Stenstrom, "The worst-case execution time problem --- overview of methods and survey of tools," ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems, vol. 7, no. 3, April 2008.
[7]
A. R. Xianfend Li and T. Mitra, "Modeling out-of-order processors for software timing analysis," in Proceedings of the 25th IEEE International Real-Time Systems Symposium, december 2004, pp. 92--103.
[8]
A. Colin and I. Puaut, "Worst case execution time analysis for a processor with branch prediction," Journal of Real time Systems, vol. 18, no. 2--3, pp. 249--274, May 2000.
[9]
B. Franke, "Fast cycle-approximate instruction set simulation," in Proceedings of the 11th international workshop on Software & compilers for embedded systems, 2008, pp. 69--78.
[10]
B. Franke and D. C. Powell, "Using continuous statistical machine learning to enable high-speed performance prediction in hybrid instruction/cycle-accurate instruction set simulators," in Proceedings of the 7th IEEE/ACM international conference on Hardware/software codesign and system synthesis, 2009, pp. 315--324.
[11]
X. Li, A. Roychoudhury, and T. Mitra, "Modeling out-of-order processors for wcet analysis," Real-Time Systems, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 195--227, 2006.
[12]
M. Gligor, N. Fournel, and F. Pétrot, "Using binary translation in event driven simulation for fast and flexible MPSoC simulation," in Proceedings of the 7th IEEE/ACM/IFIP international conference on hardware/software codesign and system synthesis, 2009, pp. 71--80.
[13]
A. Seznec, "The l-tage branch predictor," Journal of Instruction-Level Parallelism, vol. 9, July 2007.
Recommendations
An Alternative TAGE-like Conditional Branch Predictor
TAGE is one of the most accurate conditional branch predictors known today. However, TAGE does not exploit its input information perfectly, as it is possible to obtain significant prediction accuracy improvements by complementing TAGE with a statistical ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In

Sponsors
- EDAA: European Design Automation Association
- ECSI
- EDAC: Electronic Design Automation Consortium
- SIGDA: ACM Special Interest Group on Design Automation
- Russian Acadamy of Sciences: Russian Acadamy of Sciences
- IEEE Council on Electronic Design Automation (CEDA)
Publisher
EDA Consortium
San Jose, CA, United States
Publication History
Published: 09 March 2015
Check for updates
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
DATE '15
Sponsor:
- EDAA
- EDAC
- SIGDA
- Russian Acadamy of Sciences
Acceptance Rates
DATE '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 206 of 915 submissions, 23%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 518 of 1,794 submissions, 29%
Upcoming Conference
DATE '25
- Sponsor:
- sigda
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 144Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)2
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in