Search Results

Documents authored by Evrard, Hugues

Document
Artifact
DOI: 10.4230/DARTS.6.2.3
Putting Randomized Compiler Testing into Production (Artifact)

Authors: Alastair F. Donaldson, Hugues Evrard, and Paul Thomson

Published in: DARTS, Volume 6, Issue 2, Special Issue of the 34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020)

Abstract
This artifact accompanies our experience report for our compiler testing technology transfer project: taking the GraphicsFuzz research project on randomized metamorphic testing of graphics shader compilers, and building the necessary tooling around it to provide a highly automated process for improving the Khronos Vulkan Conformance Test Suite (CTS) with test cases that expose fuzzer-found compiler bugs, or that plug gaps in test coverage. The artifact consists of two Dockerfiles and associated files that can be used to build two Docker containers. The containers include our main tool for performing fuzzing: gfauto. The containers allow the user to fuzz SwiftShader, a software Vulkan implementation, finding 4 bugs. The user will also perform some line coverage analysis of SwiftShader using our tools to synthesize a small test that increases line coverage. Ubuntu, gfauto, SwiftShader, and other dependencies inside the Docker containers are fixed at specific versions, and all random seeds are set to specific values. Thus, all examples should reproduce faithfully on any machine.
Cite as

Alastair F. Donaldson, Hugues Evrard, and Paul Thomson. Putting Randomized Compiler Testing into Production (Artifact). In Special Issue of the 34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020). Dagstuhl Artifacts Series (DARTS), Volume 6, Issue 2, pp. 3:1-3:2, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2020)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@Article{donaldson_et_al:DARTS.6.2.3,
  author =	{Donaldson, Alastair F. and Evrard, Hugues and Thomson, Paul},
  title =	{{Putting Randomized Compiler Testing into Production (Artifact)}},
  pages =	{3:1--3:2},
  journal =	{Dagstuhl Artifacts Series},
  ISSN =	{2509-8195},
  year =	{2020},
  volume =	{6},
  number =	{2},
  editor =	{Donaldson, Alastair F. and Evrard, Hugues and Thomson, Paul},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DARTS.6.2.3},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-132005},
  doi =		{10.4230/DARTS.6.2.3},
  annote =	{Keywords: Compilers, metamorphic testing, 3D graphics, experience report}
}
Document
Experience Report
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.ECOOP.2020.22
Putting Randomized Compiler Testing into Production (Experience Report)

Authors: Alastair F. Donaldson, Hugues Evrard, and Paul Thomson

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 166, 34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020)

Abstract
We describe our experience over the last 18 months on a compiler testing technology transfer project: taking the GraphicsFuzz research project on randomized metamorphic testing of graphics shader compilers, and building the necessary tooling around it to provide a highly automated process for improving the Khronos Vulkan Conformance Test Suite (CTS) with test cases that expose fuzzer-found compiler bugs, or that plug gaps in test coverage. We present this tooling for test automation - gfauto - in detail, as well as our use of differential coverage and test case reduction as a method for automatically synthesizing tests that fill coverage gaps. We explain the value that GraphicsFuzz has provided in automatically testing the ecosystem of tools for transforming, optimizing and validating Vulkan shaders, and the challenges faced when testing a tool ecosystem rather than a single tool. We discuss practical issues associated with putting automated metamorphic testing into production, related to test case validity, bug de-duplication and floating-point precision, and provide illustrative examples of bugs found during our work.
Cite as

Alastair F. Donaldson, Hugues Evrard, and Paul Thomson. Putting Randomized Compiler Testing into Production (Experience Report). In 34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 166, pp. 22:1-22:29, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2020)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{donaldson_et_al:LIPIcs.ECOOP.2020.22,
  author =	{Donaldson, Alastair F. and Evrard, Hugues and Thomson, Paul},
  title =	{{Putting Randomized Compiler Testing into Production}},
  booktitle =	{34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020)},
  pages =	{22:1--22:29},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-154-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2020},
  volume =	{166},
  editor =	{Hirschfeld, Robert and Pape, Tobias},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ECOOP.2020.22},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-131791},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.ECOOP.2020.22},
  annote =	{Keywords: Compilers, metamorphic testing, 3D graphics, experience report}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CONCUR.2018.23
GPU Schedulers: How Fair Is Fair Enough?

Authors: Tyler Sorensen, Hugues Evrard, and Alastair F. Donaldson

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 118, 29th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR 2018)

Abstract
Blocking synchronisation idioms, e.g. mutexes and barriers, play an important role in concurrent programming. However, systems with semi-fair schedulers, e.g. graphics processing units (GPUs), are becoming increasingly common. Such schedulers provide varying degrees of fairness, guaranteeing enough to allow some, but not all, blocking idioms. While a number of applications that use blocking idioms do run on today's GPUs, reasoning about liveness properties of such applications is difficult as documentation is scarce and scattered. In this work, we aim to clarify fairness properties of semi-fair schedulers. To do this, we define a general temporal logic formula, based on weak fairness, parameterised by a predicate that enables fairness per-thread at certain points of an execution. We then define fairness properties for three GPU schedulers: HSA, OpenCL, and occupancy-bound execution. We examine existing GPU applications and show that none of the above schedulers are strong enough to provide the fairness properties required by these applications. It hence appears that existing GPU scheduler descriptions do not entirely capture the fairness properties that are provided on current GPUs. Thus, we present two new schedulers that aim to support existing GPU applications. We analyse the behaviour of common blocking idioms under each scheduler and show that one of our new schedulers allows a more natural implementation of a GPU protocol.
Cite as

Tyler Sorensen, Hugues Evrard, and Alastair F. Donaldson. GPU Schedulers: How Fair Is Fair Enough?. In 29th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR 2018). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 118, pp. 23:1-23:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2018)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{sorensen_et_al:LIPIcs.CONCUR.2018.23,
  author =	{Sorensen, Tyler and Evrard, Hugues and Donaldson, Alastair F.},
  title =	{{GPU Schedulers: How Fair Is Fair Enough?}},
  booktitle =	{29th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR 2018)},
  pages =	{23:1--23:17},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-087-3},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2018},
  volume =	{118},
  editor =	{Schewe, Sven and Zhang, Lijun},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CONCUR.2018.23},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-95619},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CONCUR.2018.23},
  annote =	{Keywords: GPU scheduling, Blocking synchronisation, GPU semantics}
}
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact