Premium
A study on popular auto‐parallelization frameworks
Author(s) -
Prema S.,
Nasre Rupesh,
Jehadeesan R.,
Panigrahi B.K.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
concurrency and computation: practice and experience
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.309
H-Index - 67
eISSN - 1532-0634
pISSN - 1532-0626
DOI - 10.1002/cpe.5168
Subject(s) - automatic parallelization , computer science , speedup , parallel computing , compiler , loop (graph theory) , variance (accounting) , programming language , mathematics , accounting , combinatorics , business
Summary We study five popular auto‐parallelization frameworks (Cetus, Par4all, Rose, ICC, and Pluto) and compare them qualitatively as well as quantitatively. All the frameworks primarily deal with loop parallelization but differ in the techniques used to identify parallelization opportunities. Due to this variance, various aspects, such as certain loop transformations, are supported only in a few frameworks. The frameworks exhibit varying abilities in handling loop‐carried dependence and, therefore, achieve different amounts of speedup on widely used PolyBench and NAS parallel benchmarks. In particular, Intel C Compiler (ICC) fares as an overall good parallelizer. Our study also highlights the need for more sophisticated analyses, user‐driven parallelization, and meta‐auto‐parallelizer that provides combined benefits of various frameworks.