Rune Krauss
Mehran Goli
Rolf Drechsler
ABSTRACT
In recent years, hardware systems have significantly grown in complexity. Due to the increasing complexity, there is a need to continuously improve the quality of the hardware design process. This leads designers to strive for more efficient data structures and algorithms operating on them to guarantee the correct behavior of such systems through verification techniques like model checking and meet time-to-market constraints. A Binary Decision Diagram (BDD) is a suitable data structure as it provides a canonical compact representation of Boolean functions, given variable ordering, and efficient algorithms for manipulating them. However, reduced ordered BDDs also have challenges: There is a large memory consumption for the BDD construction of some complex practical functions and the use of realizations in the form of BDD packages strongly depends on the application.
To address these issues, this paper presents a novel multi-core package called Engineer Decision Diagrams Yourself (EDDY) with dynamic memory management and reduced fragmentation. Experiments on BDD benchmarks of both combinational circuits and model checking show that using EDDY leads to a significantly performance boost compared to state-of-the-art packages.
- T. Anderson. 1990. The Performance of Spin Lock Alternatives for Shared-Memory Multiprocessors. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 1, 1 (1990), 6--16. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- C. Baier and J. Katoen. 2008. Principles of Model Checking. The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- K. Brace, R. Rudell, and R. Bryant. 1991. Efficient Implementation of a BDD Package. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 40--45. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Bryant. 1986. Graph-Based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation. IEEE Trans. Comput. 35, 8 (1986), 677--691.Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Bryant. 1991. On the complexity of VLSI implementations and graph representations of Boolean functions with application to integer multiplication. IEEE Trans. Comput. 40, 3 (1991), 205--213. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Burch, E. Clarke, D. Long, K. McMillan, and D. Dill. 1994. Symbolic model checking for sequential circuit verification. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 13, 4 (1994), 401--424. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Burch, E. Clarke, K. McMillan, D. Dill, and L. Hwang. 1992. Symbolic model checking: 1020 States and beyond. Information and Computation 98, 2 (1992), 142--170. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Chaki and A. Gurfinkel. 2018. BDD-Based Symbolic Model Checking. Springer. 219--245 pages.Google Scholar
- A. Cimatti, E. Clarke, F. Giunchiglia, and M. Roveri. 2000. NUSMV: a new symbolic model checker. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 2, 4 (2000), 410--425. Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. Clarke, E. Emerson, and A. Sistla. 1986. Automatic Verification of Finite-State Concurrent Systems Using Temporal Logic Specifications. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 8, 2 (1986), 244--263. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Cong and D. Bader. 2004. Lock-Free Parallel Algorithms: An Experimental Study. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on High Performance Computing. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 516--527. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Drechsler and D. Sieling. 2001. Binary decision diagrams in theory and practice. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 3, 2 (2001), 112--136. Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Janssen. 2001. Design of a Pointerless BDD Package. In International Workshop on Logic and Synthesis. 310--315.Google Scholar
- G. Janssen. 2003. A consumer report on BDD packages. In Proceedings of the 16th Symposium on Integrated Circuits and Systems Design. IEEE Computer Society, USA, 217--222. Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Mailund. 2019. The Joys of Hashing. Springer. 21--47 pages.Google Scholar
- K. McMillan. 1993. Symbolic Model Checking. Springer.Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Meinel and T. Theobald. 2012. Algorithms and Data Structures in VLSI Design. Springer.Google Scholar
- J. Nielsen. 1996. BuDDy: A BDD package. http://buddy.sourceforge.net/manualGoogle Scholar
- R. Rajwar and J. Goodman. 2002. Transactional Lock-Free Execution of Lock-Based Programs. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5--17. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Seiffertt. 2017. Boolean Algebra. Springer. 11--24 pages.Google Scholar
- C. Shannon. 1938. A symbolic analysis of relay and switching circuits. Transactions of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers 57, 12 (1938), 713--723. Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. Somenzi. 1995. CUDD: CU Decision Diagram Package. http://web.mit.edu/sage/export/tmp/y/usr/share/doc/polybori/cuddGoogle Scholar
- F. Somenzi. 2001. Efficient manipulation of decision diagrams. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 3, 2 (2001), 171--181. Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Toda and K. Tsuda. 2015. BDD Construction for All Solutions SAT and Efficient Caching Mechanism. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1880--1886. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. van Dijk, E. Hahn, D. Jansen, Y. Li, T. Neele, M. Stoelinga, A. Turrini, and L. Zhang. 2015. A Comparative Study of BDD Packages for Probabilistic Symbolic Model Checking. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Dependable Software Engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 35--51. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. van Dijk and J. Pol. 2015. Sylvan: Multi-Core Decision Diagrams. In Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 677--691.Google Scholar
- J. Wang and W. Tepfenhart. 2019. Propositional Logic. Taylor & Francis. 83--114 pages.Google Scholar
- B. Yang, R. Bryant, D. O'Hallaron, A. Biere, O. Coudert, G. Janssen, R. Ranjan, and F. Somenzi. 1998. A Performance Study of BDD-Based Model Checking. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 255--289.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- EDDY: A Multi-Core BDD Package with Dynamic Memory Management and Reduced Fragmentation
Recommendations
Chain Reduction for Binary and Zero-Suppressed Decision Diagrams
AbstractChain reduction enables reduced ordered binary decision diagrams (BDDs) and zero-suppressed binary decision diagrams (ZDDs) to each take advantage of the other’s ability to symbolically represent Boolean functions in compact form. For any Boolean ...
Using XBDDs and ZBDDs in points-to analysis
Binary decision diagrams (BDDs) have recently become widely accepted as a space-efficient method of representing relations in points-to or reference analyses. When BDDs are used to represent relations, each element of a domain is assigned a bit pattern ...
A Characterization of Binary Decision Diagrams
Binary decision diagrams (BDDs) are a representation of Boolean functions. Its use in the synthesis, simulation, and testing of Boolean circuits has been proposed by various researchers. In all these applications of BDDs solutions to some fundamental ...
Comments