Impact of virtual execution environments on processor energy consumption and hardware adaptation

ABSTRACT

During recent years, microprocessor energy consumption has been surging and efforts to reduce power and energy have received a lot of attention. At the same time, virtual execution environments (VEEs), such as Java virtual machines, have grown in popularity. Hence, it is important to evaluate the impact of virtual execution environments on microprocessor energy consumption. This paper characterizes the energy and power impact of two important components of VEEs, Just-in-time(JIT) optimization and garbage collection. We find that by reducing instruction counts, JIT optimization significantly reduces energy consumption, while garbage collection incurs runtime overhead that consumes more energy. Importantly, both JIT optimization and garbage collection decrease the average power dissipated by a program. Detailed analysis reveals that both JIT optimizer and JIT optimized code dissipate less power than un-optimized code. On the other hand, being memory bound and with low ILP, the garbage collector dissipates less power than the application code, but rarely affects the average power of the latter.Adaptive microarchitectures are another recent trend for energy reduction where microarchitectural resources can be dynamically tuned to match program runtime requirements. This research reveals that both JIT optimization and garbage collection alter a program's behavior and runtime requirements, which considerably affects the adaptation of configurable hardware units, and influences the overall energy consumption. This work also demonstrates that the adaptation preferences of the two VEE services differ substantially from those of the application code. Both VEE services prefer a simple core for high energy reduction. On the other hand, the JIT optimizer usually requires larger data caches, while the garbage collector rarely benefits from large data caches. The insights gained in this paper point to novel techniques that can further reduce microprocessor energy consumption.

REFERENCES

• 1: D. Albonesi, Selective Cache Ways: On-Demond Cache Resource Allocation, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Microarchitecture, November 1999.
• 2: A. W. Appel. Simple Generational Garbage Collection and Fast Allocation, Software: Practice and Experience, 19(2):171--183, 1989.
• 3: B. Alpern, D. Attanasio, J. Barton, A. Cocchi, D. Lieber, S. Smith, and T. Ngo. Implementing Jalapeno in Java, ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, 1999.
• 4: M. Arnold, S. Fink, D. Grove, M. Hind, and P. Sweeney. A Survey of Adaptive Optimization in Virtual Machine, Proceedings of the IEEE, 93(2), Feb. 2005.
• 5: S. Blackburn, P. Cheng, K. McKinley, Myths and Realities: The Performance Impact of Garbage Collection. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMETRICS/Performance, 2004.
• 6: S. Blackburn, R. Jones, K. McKinley, and J. Moss. Beltway: Getting Around Garbage Collection Gridlock, In ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI), 2002.
• 7: D. Brooks, V. Tiwari and M. Martonosi, Wattch: A Framework for Architectural-level Power Analysis and Optimizations, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Architecture, June 2000.
• 8: L. Chakrapani, P. Korkmaz, V. Mooney III, V. Palem, and K. Puttaswamy, and W. Wong. The Emerging Power Crisis in Embedded Processors: What Can a (Poor) Compiler Do? In Proceedings of the 2001 International Conference on Compilers, Architecture, and Synthesis for Embedded Systems, 2001.
• 9: D. Folegnani and A. Gonzalez, Energy-Effective Issue Logic, Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Computer Architecture, June 2001.
• 10: T. Heath, E. Pinheiro, J. Hom, U. Kremer, and R. Bianchini. Application Transformations for Energy and Performance-Aware Device Management. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Parallel Architectures and Compilation Techniques, 2002.
• 11: C.-H. Hsu, and U. Kremer. The Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Compiler Algorithm for CPU Energy Reduction. the Conference on Programming Languages, Design, and Implementation, 2003.
• 12: S. Hu, M. Valluri, and L. John, Effective Adaptive Computing Environment Management Using a Dynamic Optimization System, 2005 International Symposium on Code Generation and Optimization, March 2005.
• 13: X Huang, J. Moss, K. McKinley, S. Blackburn, and D. Burger, Dynamic SimpleScalar: simulating Java Virtual Machines. The First Workshop on Managed Run Time Environment Workloads, 2003.
• 14: A. Joshi, S. Kumar, S. Sambamurthy, and Lizy John, Power Modeling of SDRAMs, Technical Report TR-040126-2, Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, 2004.
• 15: M. Kandemir, N. Vijaykrishnan, M. J. Irwin, and W. Ye. Influence of Compiler Optimizations on System Power Proceedings of the 2000 Design Automation Conference, 2000.
• 16: D. Ponomarev, G. Kucuk, K. Ghose, Reducing Power Requirements of Instruction Scheduling Through Dynamic Allocation of Multiple Datapath Resources, Proceedings of the 34th International Symposium on Microarchitecture, Dec. 2001.
• 17: J. Seng, and D. Tullsen. The Effect of Compiler Optimizations on Pentium 4 Power Consumption, Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Interaction between Compilers and Computer Architectures, 2003.
• 18: T. Simunic, L. Benini, and G. D. Micheli. Energy Efficient Design of Battery-Powered Embedded Systems, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration Systems, 9(1), Feb. 2001.
• 19: T.Sherwood, S. Sair, and B. Calder, Phase Tracking and Prediction, Proceedings of the 30th International Symposium on Computer Architecture, June 2003.
• 20: Y. Shuf, M. Serrano, M. Gupta, and J. Singh, Characterizing the Memory Behavior of Java Workloads: A Structured View and Opportunities for Optimizations, ACM SIGMETRICS, 2001.
• 21: M. G. Valluri and L. John. Is Compiling for Performance = Compiling for Power? The 5th Annual Workshop on Interaction between Compilers and Computer Architectures, 2001.
• 22: M. G. Valluri, L. John, and K. S. McKinley. Low-Power, Low-Complexity Instruction Issue Using Compiler Assistance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Supercomputing, 2005.
• 23: Q. Wu, V. Reddi, Y. Wu, D. Connors, D. Brooks, M. Martonosi, and D. Clark. A Dynamic Compilation Framework for Controlling Microprocessor Energy and Performance. Proceedings of the 38th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture, 2005.
• 24: H. Yang, G. Gao, and C. Leung. On Achieving Balanced Power Consumption in Software Pipelined Loops, Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on Compilers, Architecture, and Synthesis for Embedded Systems, 2002.
• 25: SPECjvm98 Benchmarks, http://www.spec.org/osg/jvm98
• 26: Java technology, http://java.sun.com
• 27: NET technology, http://www.microsoft.com/net/default.mspx

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  B. Hardware
  B.8 Performance and Reliability
      B.8.2 Performance Analysis and Design Aids

General Terms:
Experimentation, Management, Measurement

Keywords:
energy efficiency, hardware adaptation, power dissipation