2005ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering NotesRequires access

Low overhead program monitoring and profiling

Naveen Kumar, Bruce R. Childers, Mary Lou Soffa

Open publisher page 40 citations

Abstract

Program instrumentation, inserted either before or during execution, is rapidly becoming a necessary component of many systems. Instrumentation is commonly used to collect information for many diverse analysis applications, such as detecting program invariants, dynamic slicing and alias analysis, software security checking, and computer architecture modeling. Because instrumentation typically has a high run-time overhead, techniques are needed to mitigate the overheads. This paper describes "instrumentation optimizations" that reduce the overhead of profiling for program analysis. Our approach applies transformations to the instrumentation code that reduce the (1) number of instrumentation points executed, (2) cost of instrumentation probes, and (3) cost of instrumentation payload, while maintaining the semantics of the original instrumentation. We present the transformations and apply them for program profiling and computer architecture modeling. We evaluate the optimizations and show that the optimizations improve profiling performance by 1.26-2.63x and architecture modeling performance by 2-3.3x.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Program instrumentation, inserted either before or during execution, is rapidly becoming a necessary component of many systems. Instrumentation is commonly used to collect information for many diverse analysis applications, such as detecting program invariants, dynamic slicing and alias analysis, software security checking, and computer architecture modeling. Because instrumentation typically has a high run-time overhead, techniques are needed to mitigate the overheads. This paper describes "instrumentation optimizations" that reduce the overhead of profiling for program analysis. Our approach applies transformations to the instrumentation code that reduce the (1) number of instrumentation points executed, (2) cost of instrumentation probes, and (3) cost of instrumentation payload, while maintaining the semantics of the original instrumentation. We present the transformations and apply them for program profiling and computer architecture modeling. We evaluate the optimizations and show that the optimizations improve profiling performance by 1.26-2.63x and architecture modeling performance by 2-3.3x.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 40 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Program instrumentation, inserted either before or during execution, is rapidly becoming a necessary component of many systems. Instrumentation is commonly used to collect information for many diverse analysis applications, such as detecting program invariants, dynamic slicing and alias analysis, software security checking, and computer architecture modeling. Because instrumentation typically has a high run-time overhead, techniques are needed to mitigate the overheads. This paper describes "instrumentation optimizations" that reduce the overhead of profiling for program analysis. Our approach applies transformations to the instrumentation code that reduce the (1) number of instrumentation points executed, (2) cost of instrumentation probes, and (3) cost of instrumentation payload, while maintaining the semantics of the original instrumentation. We present the transformations and apply them for program profiling and computer architecture modeling. We evaluate the optimizations and show that the optimizations improve profiling performance by 1.26-2.63x and architecture modeling performance by 2-3.3x.

Key concepts: Instrumentation (computer programming), Profiling (computer programming), Computer science, Embedded system, Program analysis, Overhead (engineering), Computer architecture, Operating system

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Low overhead program monitoring and profiling — Research Paper | ScholarLens