Constraint-based locality analysis for X10 programs

X10 is a HPC (High Performance Computing) programming language proposed by IBM for supporting a PGAS (Partitioned Global Address Space) programming model offering a shared address space. The address space can be further partitioned into several logical locations where objects and activities (or threads) will be dynamically created. An analysis of locations can help to check the safety of object accesses through exploring which objects and activities may reside in which locations, while in practice the objects and activities are usually designated at runtime and their locations may also vary under different environments. In this paper, we propose a constraint-based locality analysis method called Leopard for X10. Leopard calculates the points-to relations for analyzing the objects and activities in a program and uses a place constraint graph to analyze their locations.We have developed a tool to support Leopard, and conducted an experiment to evaluate its effectiveness and efficiency. The experimental results show that Leopard can calculate the locations of objects and activities precisely.

[1]  Jason Duell,et al.  Productivity and performance using partitioned global address space languages , 2007, PASCO '07.

[2]  Michael Hind,et al.  Pointer analysis: haven't we solved this problem yet? , 2001, PASTE '01.

[3]  Ondrej Lhoták,et al.  Context-Sensitive Points-to Analysis: Is It Worth It? , 2006, CC.

[4]  Monica S. Lam,et al.  Cloning-based context-sensitive pointer alias analysis using binary decision diagrams , 2004, PLDI '04.

[5]  Ben Hardekopf,et al.  Semi-sparse flow-sensitive pointer analysis , 2009, POPL '09.

[6]  Vineet Kahlon.  Bootstrapping: a technique for scalable flow and context-sensitive pointer alias analysis , 2008, PLDI '08.

[7]  Martin C. Rinard,et al.  Compositional pointer and escape analysis for Java programs , 1999, OOPSLA '99.

[8]  Jong-Deok Choi,et al.  Interprocedural pointer alias analysis , 1999, TOPL.

[9]  Vivek Sarkar,et al.  May-happen-in-parallel analysis of X10 programs , 2007, PPoPP.

[10]  Bjarne Steensgaard,et al.  Points-to analysis in almost linear time , 1996, POPL '96.

[11]  Thomas W. Reps,et al.  Program analysis via graph reachability , 1997, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[12]  Jong-Deok Choi,et al.  Efficient flow-sensitive interprocedural computation of pointer-induced aliases and side effects , 1993, POPL '93.

[13]  R. K. Shyamasundar,et al.  Static Detection of Place Locality and Elimination of Runtime Checks , 2008, APLAS.

[14]  Ondrej Lhoták,et al.  Scaling Java Points-to Analysis Using SPARK , 2003, CC.

[15]  Barbara G. Ryder,et al.  Parameterized object sensitivity for points-to analysis for Java , 2005, TSEM.

[16]  Vivek Sarkar,et al.  Type inference for locality analysis of distributed data structures , 2008, PPoPP.

[17]  Monica S. Lam,et al.  Efficient context-sensitive pointer analysis for C programs , 1995, PLDI '95.

[18]  Lars Ole Andersen,et al.  Program Analysis and Specialization for the C Programming Language , 2005 .

[19]  Laurie J. Hendren,et al.  Context-sensitive interprocedural points-to analysis in the presence of function pointers , 1994, PLDI '94.

[20]  Hongtao Yu,et al.  Level by level: making flow- and context-sensitive pointer analysis scalable for millions of lines of code , 2010, CGO '10.

[21]  Alexander Aiken,et al.  Polymorphic versus Monomorphic Flow-Insensitive Points-to Analysis for C , 2000, SAS.

[22]  Barbara G. Ryder,et al.  Interprocedural modification side effect analysis with pointer aliasing , 1993, PLDI '93.