research-article

Quasi-static scheduling for safe futures

Authors:

Suresh JagannathanAuthors Info & Claims

PPoPP '08: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and practice of parallel programming

Pages 23 - 32

https://doi.org/10.1145/1345206.1345212

Published: 20 February 2008 Publication History

Abstract

Migrating sequential programs to effectively utilize next generation multicore architectures is a key challenge facing application developers and implementors. Languages like Java that support complex control- and dataflow abstractions confound classical automatic parallelization techniques. On the other hand, introducing multithreading and concurrency control explicitly into programs can impose a high conceptual burden on the programmer, and may entail a significant rewrite of the original program.

In this paper, we consider a new technique to address this issue. Our approach makes use of futures, a simple annotation that introduces asynchronous concurrency into Java programs, but provides no concurrency control. To ensure concurrent execution does not yield behavior inconsistent with sequential execution (i.e., execution yielded by erasing all futures), we present a new interprocedural summary-based dataflow analysis. The analysis inserts lightweight barriers that block and resume threads executing futures if a dependency violation may ensue. There are no constraints on how threads execute other than those imposed by these barriers.

Our experimental results indicate futures can be leveraged to transparently ensure safety and profitably exploit parallelism; in contrast to earlier efforts, our technique is completely portable, and requires no modifications to the underlying JVM.

References

[1]

Multitreemap. http://sourceforge.net/projects/multitreemap/.

[2]

David F. Bacon, Susan L. Graham, and Oliver J. Sharp. Compiler transformations for high-performance computing. ACM Computing Surveys, 26(4):345--420, 1994.

Digital Library

[3]

S. M. Blackburn, R. Garner, C. Hoffman, A. M. Khan, K. S. McKinley, R. Bentzur, A. Diwan, D. Feinberg, D. Frampton, S. Z. Guyer, M. Hirzel, A. Hosking, M. Jump, H. Lee, J. E. B. Moss, A. Phansalkar, D. Stefanoviç, T. VanDrunen, D. von Dincklage, and B. Wiedermann. The DaCapo benchmarks: Java benchmarking development and analysis. In OOPSLA, pages 169--190, 2006.

Digital Library

[4]

Robert D. Blumofe, Christopher F. Joerg, Bradley C. Kuszmaul, Charles E. Leiserson, Keith H. Randall, and Yuli Zhou. Cilk: an efficient multithreaded runtime system. Journal of Parallel Distributed Computing, 37(1):55--69, 1996.

Digital Library

[5]

John Boyland. Checking interference with fractional permissions. In SAS, pages 55--72, 2003.

Digital Library

[6]

Michael J. Carey, David J. DeWitt, and Jeffrey F. Naughton. The OO7 benchmark. In SIGMOD, pages 12--21, 1993.

Digital Library

[7]

J. Choi, M. Gupta, M. Serrano, V. C. Sreedhar, and S. Midkiff. Escape analysis for Java. In OOPSLA, pages 1--19, 1999.

Digital Library

[8]

Chen Ding, Xipeng Shen, Kirk Kelsey, Chris Tice, Ruke Huang, and Chengliang Zhang. Software behavior oriented parallelization. In PLDI, pages 223--234, 2007.

Digital Library

[9]

Cormac Flanagan and Matthias Felleisen. The semantics of future and its use in program optimizations. In POPL.

Digital Library

[10]

Mary W. Hall, Brian R. Murphy, Saman P. Amarasinghe, Shih-Wei Liao, and Monica S. Lam. Interprocedural analysis for parallelization. In LCPC, pages 61--80, 1995.

Digital Library

[11]

R. Halstead. Multilisp: A Language for Concurrent Symbolic Computation. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 7(4):501--538, 1985.

Digital Library

[12]

Tim Harris and Keir Fraser. Language Support for Lightweight Transactions. In OOPSLA, pages 388--402, 2003.

Digital Library

[13]

Tim Harris and Satnam Singh. Feedback Directed Implicit Parallelism. In IFCP, pages 251--264, 2007.

Digital Library

[14]

Maurice Herlihy, Victor Luchangco, Mark Moir, and William N. Scherer, III. Software Transactional Memory for Dynamic-Sized Data Structures. In PODC, pages 92--101, 2003.

Digital Library

[15]

Maurice Herlihy and J. Eliot B. Moss. Transactional memory: architectural support for lock-free data structures. In ISCA, pages 289--300, 1993.

Digital Library

[16]

Troy A. Johnson, Rudolf Eigenmann, and T. N. Vijaykumar. Min-cut program decomposition for thread-level speculation. In PLDI, pages 59--70, 2004.

Digital Library

[17]

R. Kelsey, W. Clinger, and J. Rees. Revised 5 report on the algorithmic language scheme. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 11(3):7--105, 1998.

Digital Library

[18]

David Kranz, Robert H. Halstead, Jr., and Eric Mohr. Mul-T: A High-Performance Parallel Lisp. In PLDI, pages 81--90, 1989.

Digital Library

[19]

Milind Kulkarni, Keshav Pingali, Bruce Walter, Ganesh Ramanarayanan, Kavita Bala, and L. Paul Chew. Optimistic parallelism requires abstractions. In PLDI, pages 211--222, 2007.

Digital Library

[20]

O. Lhotak. Spark: A flexible points-to analysis framework for java. Master?s thesis, McGill University, 2002.

[21]

Wei Liu, James Tuck, Luis Ceze, Wonsun Ahn, Karin Strauss, Jose Renau, and Josep Torrellas. Posh: a tls compiler that exploits program structure. In PPOPP, pages 158--167, 2006.

Digital Library

[22]

B. McCloskey, F. Zhou, D. Gay, and E. Brewer. Autolocker: Synchronization Inference for Atomic Sections. In POPL, pages 346--358, 2006.

Digital Library

[23]

Rick Mohr, David Kranz, and Robert Halstead. Lazy task creation: A technique for increasing the granularity of parallel programs. In LFP, pages 185--197, 1990.

Digital Library

[24]

Martin C. Rinard and Pedro C. Diniz. Commutativity analysis: A technique for automatically parallelizing pointer-based computations. In IPPS, pages 14--22, 1996.

Digital Library

[25]

Martin C. Rinard, Daniel J. Scales, and Monica S. Lam. Jade: A High-Level, Machine-Independent Language for Parallel Programming. IEEE Computer, 26(6):28--38, 1993.

Digital Library

[26]

R. Rugina and M. C. Rinard. Pointer analysis for structured parallel programs. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 25(1):70--116, 2003.

Digital Library

[27]

L. A. Smith, J. M. Bull, and J. Obdrzalek. A parallel java grande benchmark suite. In ACM Supercomputing, page 8, 2001.

Digital Library

[28]

J. Greggory Steffan, Christopher B. Colohan, Antonia Zhai, and Todd C. Mowry. A scalable approach to thread-level speculation. In ISCA, pages 1--12, 2000.

Digital Library

[29]

C. von Praun, L. Ceze, and C. Cascaval. Implicit parallelism with ordered transactions. In PPOPP, pages 79--89, 2007.

Digital Library

[30]

Adam Welc, Suresh Jagannathan, and Antony Hosking. Safe futures for java. In OOPSLA, pages 439--453, 2005.

Digital Library

[31]

L. Rauchwerger Y. Zhan and J. Torrellas. Hardware for speculative run-time parallelization in distributed shared-memory multiprocessors. In HPCA, pages 162--173, 1998.\endthebibliography

Digital Library

Cited By

Muller S(2022)Static prediction of parallel computation graphsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/34987086:POPL(1-31)Online publication date: 12-Jan-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3498708
Voss CCogumbreiro TSarkar VHollingsworth JKeidar I(2019)Transitive joinsProceedings of the 24th Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming10.1145/3293883.3295724(378-390)Online publication date: 16-Feb-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3293883.3295724
Cogumbreiro THu RMartins FYoshida N(2018)Dynamic Deadlock Verification for General Barrier SynchronisationACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems10.1145/322906041:1(1-38)Online publication date: 11-Dec-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3229060
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Quasi-static scheduling for safe futures
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software notations and tools
    1. General programming languages
      1. Language features
        Concurrent programming structures

Recommendations

Supporting exception handling for futures in Java
PPPJ '07: Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on Principles and practice of programming in Java

A future is a simple and elegant construct that programmers can use to identify potentially asynchronous computation and to introduce parallelism into serial programs. In its recent 5.0 release, Java provides an interface-based implementation of futures ...
Freedom from Deadlock of Safe Locking Policies

The usual method for preserving the consistency of a database when accessed (read and updated) concurrently by several transactions, is by locking the transactions according to some locking policy; a locking policy that guarantees the preservation of ...
Exceptionally Safe Futures
COORDINATION '09: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Coordination Models and Languages

A <em>future</em> is a well-known programming construct used to introduce concurrency to sequential programs. Computations annotated as futures are executed asynchronously and run concurrently with their continuations. Typically, futures are <em>not</em>...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

PPoPP '08: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and practice of parallel programming

February 2008

308 pages

ISBN:9781595937957

DOI:10.1145/1345206

General Chair:
Siddhartha Chatterjee
IBM Research USA
,
Program Chair:
Michael L. Scott
University of Rochester USA

Copyright © 2008 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 20 February 2008

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

PPoPP08

Sponsor:

PPoPP08: ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming

February 20 - 23, 2008

UT, Salt Lake City, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 230 of 1,014 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

24
Total Citations
View Citations
468
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)6
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 20 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Muller S(2022)Static prediction of parallel computation graphsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/34987086:POPL(1-31)Online publication date: 12-Jan-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3498708
Voss CCogumbreiro TSarkar VHollingsworth JKeidar I(2019)Transitive joinsProceedings of the 24th Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming10.1145/3293883.3295724(378-390)Online publication date: 16-Feb-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3293883.3295724
Cogumbreiro THu RMartins FYoshida N(2018)Dynamic Deadlock Verification for General Barrier SynchronisationACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems10.1145/322906041:1(1-38)Online publication date: 11-Dec-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3229060
Cogumbreiro TSurendran RMartins FSarkar VVasconcelos VGrossman M(2017)Deadlock avoidance in parallel programs with futures: why parallel tasks should not wait for strangersProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/31433591:OOPSLA(1-26)Online publication date: 12-Oct-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3143359
Surendran RSarkar V(2016)Automatic parallelization of pure method calls via conditional future synthesisACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/3022671.298403551:10(20-38)Online publication date: 19-Oct-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3022671.2984035
Surendran RSarkar VVisser ESmaragdakis Y(2016)Automatic parallelization of pure method calls via conditional future synthesisProceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications10.1145/2983990.2984035(20-38)Online publication date: 19-Oct-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2983990.2984035
Dodds MJagannathan SParkinson MSvendsen KBirkedal L(2016)Verifying Custom Synchronization Constructs Using Higher-Order Separation LogicACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems10.1145/281863838:2(1-72)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2818638
Le MFluet M(2014)Combining Shared State with Speculative Parallelism in a Functional LanguageProceedings of the 26nd 2014 International Symposium on Implementation and Application of Functional Languages10.1145/2746325.2746328(1-10)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2746325.2746328
Botinčan MDodds MJagannathan S(2013)Proof-Directed Parallelization Synthesis by Separation LogicACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems10.1145/2491522.249152535:2(1-60)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2491522.2491525
Raychev VVechev MYahav E(2013)Automatic Synthesis of Deterministic ConcurrencyStatic Analysis10.1007/978-3-642-38856-9_16(283-303)Online publication date: 2013
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38856-9_16
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents