Cross-ISA Machine Instrumentation Using Fast and Scalable Dynamic Binary Translation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Cross-ISA Machine Instrumentation Using Fast and Scalable Dynamic Binary Translation Cross-ISA Machine Instrumentation using Fast and Scalable Dynamic Binary Translation Emilio G. Cota Luca P. Carloni Columbia University Columbia University USA USA [email protected] [email protected] Abstract CCS Concepts • Software and its engineering → Vir- The rise in instruction set architecture (ISA) diversity and tual machines; Just-in-time compilers. the growing adoption of virtual machines are driving a need Keywords Dynamic Binary Translation, Binary Instrumen- for fast, scalable, full-system, cross-ISA emulation and instru- tation, Machine Emulation, Floating Point, Scalability mentation tools. Unfortunately, achieving high performance ACM Reference Format: for these cross-ISA tools is challenging due to dynamic bi- Emilio G. Cota and Luca P. Carloni. 2019. Cross-ISA Machine In- nary translation (DBT) overhead and the complexity of in- strumentation using Fast and Scalable Dynamic Binary Transla- strumenting full-system emulators. tion. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS International In this paper we improve cross-ISA emulation and in- Conference on Virtual Execution Environments (VEE ’19), April 14, strumentation performance through three novel techniques. 2019, Providence, RI, USA. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 14 pages. First, we increase floating point (FP) emulation performance https://doi.org/10.1145/3313808.3313811 by observing that most FP operations can be correctly em- ulated by surrounding the use of the host FP unit with a 1 Introduction minimal amount of non-FP code. Second, we introduce the The emergence of virtualization, combined with the rise of design of a translator with a shared code cache that scales for multi-cores and the increasing use of different instruction multi-core guests, even when they generate translated code set architectures (ISAs), highlights the need for fast, scal- in parallel at a high rate. Third, we present an ISA-agnostic able, cross-ISA machine emulators. These emulators typi- instrumentation layer that can instrument guest operations cally achieve high performance and portability by leveraging that occur outside of the DBT’s intermediate representation dynamic binary translation (DBT). Unfortunately, state-of- (IR), which are common in full-system emulators. the-art cross-ISA DBT suffers under two common scenarios. We implement our approach in Qelt, a high-performance First, emulated floating point (FP) code incurs a large over- cross-ISA machine emulator and instrumentation tool based head (2 slowdowns are typical [6]), which hinders the use × on QEMU. Our results show that Qelt scales to 32 cores when of these tools for guest applications that are FP-heavy, such emulating a guest machine used for parallel compilation, as the emulation of graphical systems (e.g. Android) or as which demonstrates scalable code translation. Furthermore, a front-end to computer architecture simulators that run experiments based on SPEC06 show that Qelt (1) outper- scientific workloads. This FP overhead is rooted in the diffi- forms QEMU as a full-system cross-ISA machine emulator culty of correctly emulating the guest’s floating point unit by 1:76 /2:18 for integer/FP workloads, (2) outperforms × × (FPU), which can greatly differ from that of the host. This is state-of-the-art, cross-ISA, full-system instrumentation tools commonly solved by forgoing the use of the host FPU, using by 1:5 -3 , and (3) can match the performance of Pin, a × × instead a much slower soft-float implementation, i.e. one in state-of-the-art, same-ISA DBI tool, when used for complex which no FP instructions are executed on the host. instrumentation such as cache simulation. Second, efficient scaling of code translation when emulat- ing multi-core systems is challenging. The scalability of code Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for translation is not an obvious concern in DBT, since code personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies execution is usually more common. However, some server are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights workloads [12] as well as parallel compilation jobs (e.g., in for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must cross-compilation testbeds of software projects that support be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or several ISAs, such as the Chromium browser [1]) can show republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific both high parallelism and large instruction footprints, which permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]. can limit the scalability of their emulation, particularly when VEE ’19, April 14, 2019, Providence, RI, USA using a shared code cache. © 2019 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM. In this paper we first address these two challenges by ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-6020-3/19/04...$15.00 improving cross-ISA DBT performance and scalability. We https://doi.org/10.1145/3313808.3313811 then combine these improvements with a novel ISA-agnostic 74 VEE ’19, April 14, 2019, Providence, RI, USA Emilio G. Cota and Luca P. Carloni instrumentation layer to produce a cross-ISA dynamic binary Guest Code instrumentation (DBI) tool, whose performance is higher stq t9,-30384 than that of existing cross-ISA DBI tools (e.g., [20, 25, 49, 54]). translate() br 0x12004d890 Same-ISA DBI tools such as DynamoRIO [11] and Pin [33] provide highly customizable instrumentation in return for TCG IR tcg_gen_code() Host Code modest performance overheads, and as a result have had movi_i64 tmp3,$0xffffffffffff8950 add_i64 tmp2,t12,tmp3 mov 0xd8(%r14),%rbp tremendous success in enabling work in fields as diverse as qemu_st_i64 t9,tmp2,leq,1 add $0xffffffffffff8950,%rbp security (e.g., [16, 29]), workload characterization (e.g., [9, 45]), deterministic execution (e.g., [3, 18, 38]) and computer Figure 1. An example of portable cross-ISA DBT. Alpha code architecture simulation (e.g., [13, 28, 37]). Our goal is thus to is translated into x86_64 using QEMU’s TCG IR. narrow the performance gap between cross-ISA DBI tools employ a system call translation layer, for example to run and these state-of-the-art same-ISA tools, in order to elicit 32-bit programs on 64-bit hosts or vice versa, it is generally similarly diverse research, yet for a variety of guest ISAs. limited to programs that are compiled for the same operat- Our contributions are as follows: ing system as the host. Full-system emulation refers to the We describe a technique to leverage the host FPU when emulation of an entire system: target hardware is emulated, • performing cross-ISA DBT to achieve high emulation per- which allows DBT-based virtualization of an entire target formance. The key insight behind our approach is to limit guest. The guest’s ISA and operating system are independent the use of the host FPU to the large subset of guest FP from the host’s. operations that yield identical results on both guest and Virtual CPUs (vCPUs). In user-mode, a vCPU corresponds host FPUs, deferring to soft-float otherwise (Section 3.1). to an emulated program’s thread of execution. In full-system We present the design of a parallel cross-ISA DBT engine • mode, a vCPU is the thread of execution used to emulate a that, while remaining memory efficient via the use ofa core of the guest CPU. shared code cache, scales for multi-core guests that gener- ate translated code in parallel (Section 3.2). Translation Block (TB). Target code is translated into We present an ISA-agnostic instrumentation layer that groups of adjacent non-branch instructions that form a so- • converts a cross-ISA DBT engine into a low-overhead called TB. Target execution is thus emulated as a traversal cross-ISA DBI tool, with support for state-of-the-art in- of connected TBs. TBs and basic blocks both terminate at strumentation features such as instrumentation injection branch instructions. TBs, however, can be terminated earlier, at the granularity of individual instructions, as well as the e.g. to force an exit from execution to handle at run-time an ability to instrument guest operations that are emulated update to emulated hardware state. outside the DBT engine (Section 3.3). Intermediate Representation (IR). Portability across ISAs We implement our approach in Qelt, a cross-ISA machine is typically achieved by relying on an IR. The example in emulator and DBI tool based on QEMU [6]. Qelt achieves Figure1 shows how QEMU’s IR, called Tiny Code Generator high performance by combining our novel techniques with (TCG), facilitates independent development of target and further DBT optimizations, which are described in Section 3.4. host-related code. As shown in Section4, Qelt scales when emulating a guest machine used for parallel compilation, and it outperforms Helpers. Sometimes the IR is not rich enough to represent (1) QEMU as both a user-mode and full-system emulator and complex guest behavior, or it could only do so by overly com- (2) state-of-the-art cross-ISA instrumentation tools. Last, for plicating target code. In such cases, helper functions are used complex instrumentation such as cache simulation, Qelt can to implement this complex behavior outside of the IR, lever- match the performance of state-of-the-art, same-ISA DBI aging the expressiveness of a full programming language. tools such as Pin. Helpers are oftentimes used to emulate instructions that in- teract with hardware state, such as the memory management 2 Background unit’s translation lookaside buffer (TLB). 2.1 Cross-ISA DBT Plugins and callbacks. Instrumentation code is built into Target and Host ISAs.
Recommended publications
  • Binary Translation Using Peephole Superoptimizers
    Binary Translation Using Peephole Superoptimizers Sorav Bansal Alex Aiken Computer Systems Lab Computer Systems Lab Stanford University Stanford University [email protected] [email protected] Abstract tecture performance for compute-intensive applica- We present a new scheme for performing binary trans- tions. lation that produces code comparable to or better than 2. Because the instruction sets of modern machines existing binary translators with much less engineering tend to be large and idiosyncratic, just writing the effort. Instead of hand-coding the translation from one translation rules from one architecture to another instruction set to another, our approach automatically is a significant engineering challenge, especially if learns translation rules using superoptimization tech- there are significant differences in the semantics of niques. We have implemented a PowerPC-x86 binary the two instruction sets. This problem is exacer- translator and report results on small and large compute- bated by the need to perform optimizations wher- intensive benchmarks. When compared to the native ever possible to minimize problem (1). compiler, our translated code achieves median perfor- mance of 67% on large benchmarks and in some small 3. Because high-performancetranslations must exploit stress tests actually outperforms the native compiler. We architecture-specific semantics to maximize perfor- also report comparisons with the open source binary mance, it is challenging to design a binary translator translator Qemu and a commercial tool, Apple’s Rosetta. that can be quickly retargeted to new architectures. We consistently outperform the former and are compara- One popular approach is to design a common inter- ble to or faster than the latter on all but one benchmark.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Full Virtualization, Paravirtualization, and Hardware Assist
    VMware Understanding Full Virtualization, Paravirtualization, and Hardware Assist Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................1 Overview of x86 Virtualization..................................................................................2 CPU Virtualization .......................................................................................................3 The Challenges of x86 Hardware Virtualization ...........................................................................................................3 Technique 1 - Full Virtualization using Binary Translation......................................................................................4 Technique 2 - OS Assisted Virtualization or Paravirtualization.............................................................................5 Technique 3 - Hardware Assisted Virtualization ..........................................................................................................6 Memory Virtualization................................................................................................6 Device and I/O Virtualization.....................................................................................7 Summarizing the Current State of x86 Virtualization Techniques......................8 Full Virtualization with Binary Translation is the Most Established Technology Today..........................8 Hardware Assist is the Future of Virtualization, but the Real Gains Have
    [Show full text]
  • Specification-Driven Dynamic Binary Translation
    Specification-Driven Dynamic Binary Translation Jens Tr¨oger December 2004 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science OUT Programming Languages and Systems Research Group Faculty of Information Technology Queensland University of Technology Brisbane, Australia Copyright c Jens Tr¨oger, MMIV. All rights reserved. [email protected] http://savage.light-speed.de/ The author hereby grants permission to the Queensland University of Technology to reproduce and distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. “But I’ve come to see that as nothing can be made that isn’t flawed, the challenge is twofold: first, not to berate oneself for what is, after all, inevitable; and second, to see in our failed perfection a different thing; a truer thing, perhaps, because it contains both our ambition and the spoiling of that ambition; the exhaustion of order, and the discovery – in the midst of despair – that the beast dogging the heels of beauty has a beauty all of its own.” Clive Barker (Galilee) Keywords Machine emulation; formal specification of machine instructions; dynamic optimization; dynamic binary translation; specification-driven dynamic binary translation. Abstract Machine emulation allows for the simulation of a real or virtual machine, the source machine, on various host computers. A machine emulator interprets programs that are compiled for the emulated machine, but normally at a much reduced speed. Therefore, in order to increase the execution speed of such interpreted programs, a machine emulator may apply different dynamic optimization techniques. In our research we focus on emulators for real machines, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems, Methods, and Computer Programs for Dynamic Binary Translation in an Interpreter
    (19) TZZ Z_¥4A_T (11) EP 2 605 134 A1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION (43) Date of publication: (51) Int Cl.: 19.06.2013 Bulletin 2013/25 G06F 9/455 (2006.01) G06F 9/45 (2006.01) (21) Application number: 12186598.4 (22) Date of filing: 14.07.2010 (84) Designated Contracting States: (72) Inventors: AL AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB • Beale, Andrew GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO Mission Viejo, CA 92692 (US) PL PT RO SE SI SK SM TR • Wilton, Loren Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (US) (30) Priority: 14.07.2009 US 502301 • Meyers, Robert 14.07.2009 US 502285 Garden Grove, CA 92840 (US) 14.07.2010 EP 10736925 (74) Representative: Hufton, David Alan (62) Document number(s) of the earlier application(s) in Harrison Goddard Foote accordance with Art. 76 EPC: Fountain Precinct 10736925.8 / 2 454 664 Balm Green Sheffield S1 2JA (GB) (27) Previously filed application: 14.07.2010 PCT/US2010/041973 Remarks: This application was filed on 28-09-2012 as a (71) Applicant: Unisys Corporation divisional application to the application mentioned Blue Bell, PA 19422 (US) under INID code 62. (54) Systems, methods, and computer programs for dynamic binary translation in an interpreter (57) Various embodiments of systems and methods the TCU causing the translation complete event; the TCU for dynamic binary translation in an interpreter are dis- preparing the second stack and scheduling the CPM to closed. An embodiment comprises a method of perform- the second stack; and the CPM executing the native ing dynamic binary translation in a Master Control Pro- code.
    [Show full text]
  • Binary Translation 1 Abstract Binary Translation Is a Technique Used To
    Binary Translation 1 Abstract Binary translation is a technique used to change an executable program for one computer architecture and operating system into an executable program for a different computer architecture and operating system. Two binary translators are among the migration tools available for Alpha AXP computers: VEST translates OpenVMS VAX binary images to OpenVMS AXP images; mx translates ULTRIX MIPS images to DEC OSF/1 AXP images. In both cases, translated code usually runs on Alpha AXP computers as fast or faster than the original code runs on the original architecture. In contrast to other migration efforts in the industry, the VAX translator reproduces subtle CISC behavior on a RISC machine, and both open-ended translators provide good performance on dynamically modified programs. Alpha AXP binary translators are important migration tools - hundreds of translated OpenVMS VAX and ULTRIX MIPS images currently run on Alpha AXP systems. When Digital started to design the Alpha AXP architecture in the fall of 1988, the Alpha AXP team was concerned about how to run existing VAX code and soon-to-exist MIPS code on the new Alpha AXP computers.[1,2] To take full advantage of the performance capability of a new computer architecture, an application must be ported by rebuilding, using native compilers. For a single program written in a standard programming language, this is a matter of recompile and run. A complex software application, however, can be built from hundreds of source pieces using dozens of tools. A native port of such an application is possible only when all parts of the build path are running on the new architecture.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of an X86 Virtual Machine Monitor
    The Evolution of an x86 Virtual Machine Monitor Ole Agesen, Alex Garthwaite, Jeffrey Sheldon, Pratap Subrahmanyam {agesen, alextg, jeffshel, pratap}@vmware.com ABSTRACT While trap-and-emulate virtualization on mainframes was Twelve years have passed since VMware engineers first virtu- well understood at the time, it was – unsurprisingly – not a alized the x86 architecture. This technological breakthrough design goal for the 4004, whose first application was in fact kicked off a transformation of an entire industry, and virtu- a Busicom calculator [7]. However, as x86 CPUs expanded alization is now (once again) a thriving business with a wide their reach, the case for virtualization gradually emerged. range of solutions being deployed, developed and proposed. There was just one problem, seemingly fundamental: the But at the base of it all, the fundamental quest is still the generally accepted wisdom held that x86 virtualization was same: running virtual machines as well as we possibly can impossible, or at best merely impractical, due to inherited on top of a virtual machine monitor. architectural quirks and a requirement to retain compatibil- ity with legacy code. We review how the x86 architecture was originally virtual- ized in the days of the Pentium II (1998), and follow the This impasse was broken twelve years ago when VMware evolution of the virtual machine monitor forward through engineers first virtualized the x86 architecture entirely in the introduction of virtual SMP, 64 bit (x64), and hard- software. By basing the virtual machine monitor (VMM) ware support for virtualization to finish with a contempo- on binary translation, the architectural features that pre- rary challenge, nested virtualization.
    [Show full text]
  • Paper Describes a Technique for Improving Runtime Perfor- Mance of Statically Translated Programs
    Performance, Correctness, Exceptions: Pick Three A Failproof Function Isolation Method for Improving Performance of Translated Binaries Andrea Gussoni Alessandro Di Federico Pietro Fezzardi Giovanni Agosta Politecnico di Milano Politecnico di Milano Politecnico di Milano Politecnico di Milano [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—Binary translation is the process of taking a pro- existing programs for which the source code is not available, gram compiled for a given CPU architecture and translate it to enabling the analyst to extract insights about its execution that run on another platform without compromising its functionality. would be otherwise very though to obtain. This paper describes a technique for improving runtime perfor- mance of statically translated programs. Binary translation presents two major challenges: func- tional correctness, and performance. Ideally, both are very First, the program to be translated is analyzed to detect important, but in practice any implementation of a binary function boundaries. Then, each function is cloned, isolated and disentangled from the rest of the executable code. This process is translator needs to make trade-offs between them. called function isolation, and it divides the code in two separate On one hand, dynamic binary translators choose to trans- portions: the isolated realm and the non-isolated realm. late code on-the-fly during execution, favoring functional cor- Isolated functions have a simpler control-flow, allowing much rectness. This choice allows to preserve functional correct- more aggressive compiler optimizations to increase performance, ness even in presence of self-modifying code, runtime code but possibly compromising functional correctness.
    [Show full text]
  • 18 a Retargetable Static Binary Translator for the ARM Architecture
    A Retargetable Static Binary Translator for the ARM Architecture BOR-YEH SHEN, WEI-CHUNG HSU, and WUU YANG, National Chiao-Tung University Machines designed with new but incompatible Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) may lack proper applica- tions. Binary translation can address this incompatibility by migrating applications from one legacy ISA to a new one, although binary translation has problems such as code discovery for variable-length ISA and code location issues for handling indirect branches. Dynamic Binary Translation (DBT) has been widely adopted for migrating applications since it avoids those problems. Static Binary Translation (SBT) is a less general solution and has not been actively researched. However, SBT performs more aggressive optimizations, which could yield more compact code and better code quality. Applications translated by SBT can consume less memory, processor cycles, and power than DBT and can be started more quickly. These advantages are even more critical for embedded systems than for general systems. In this article, we designed and implemented a new SBT tool, called LLBT, which translates ARM in- structions into LLVM IRs and then retargets the LLVM IRs to various ISAs, including ×86, ×86–64, ARM, and MIPS. LLBT leverages two important functionalities from LLVM: comprehensive optimizations and 18 retargetability. More importantly, LLBT solves the code discovery problem for ARM/Thumb binaries without resorting to interpretation. LLBT also effectively reduced the size of the address mapping table, making SBT a viable solution for embedded systems. Our experiments based on the EEMBC benchmark suite show that the LLBT-generated code can run more than 6× and 2.3× faster on average than emulation with QEMU and HQEMU, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Codbt: a Multi-Source Dynamic Binary Translator Using Hardwareâ
    Journal of Systems Architecture 56 (2010) 500–508 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Systems Architecture journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sysarc CoDBT: A multi-source dynamic binary translator using hardware–software collaborative techniques Haibing Guan, Bo Liu *, Zhengwei Qi, Yindong Yang, Hongbo Yang, Alei Liang Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China article info abstract Article history: For implementing a dynamic binary translation system, traditional software-based solutions suffer from Received 20 September 2009 significant runtime overhead and are not suitable for extra complex optimization. This paper proposes Received in revised form 24 June 2010 using hardware–software collaboration techniques to create an high efficient dynamic binary translation Accepted 24 July 2010 system, CoDBT, which emulates several heterogeneous ISAs (Instruction Set Architectures) on a host pro- Available online 5 August 2010 cessor without changing to the existing processor. We analyze the major performance bottlenecks via evaluating overhead of a pure software-solution DBT. Guidelines are provided for applying a suitable Keywords: hardware–software partition process to CoDBT, as are algorithms for designing hardware-based binary Dynamic binary translation translator and code cache management. An intermediate instruction set is introduced to make Hardware/software collaboration Multi-source multi-source translation more practicable and scalable. Meantime, a novel runtime profiling strategy is Runtime profiling integrated into the infrastructure to collect program hot spots information to supporting potential future optimizations. The advantages of using co-design as an implementation approach for DBT system are assessed by several SPEC benchmarks. Our results demonstrate that significant performance improve- ments can be achieved with appropriate hardware support choices.
    [Show full text]
  • EECS 470 Lecture 20 Binary Translation
    © Wenisch 2007 ‐‐ Portions © Austin, Brehob, Falsafi, Hill, Hoe, Lipasti, Shen, Smith, Sohi, Tyson, Vijaykumar EECS 470 Lecture 20 Binary Translation Fall 2007 Prof. Thomas Wenisch http://www.eecs.umich.edu/courses/eecs4 70 Slides developed in part by Profs. Austin, Brehob, Falsafi, Hill, Hoe, Lipasti, Shen, Smith, Sohi, Tyson, and Vijaykumar of Carnegie Mellon University, Purdue University, University of Michigan, and University of Wisconsin. Lecture 20 EECS 470 Slide 1 © Wenisch 2007 ‐‐ Portions © Austin, Brehob, Falsafi, Hill, Hoe, Lipasti, Shen, Smith, Sohi, Tyson, Vijaykumar Announcements No class Wednesday Project due 12/10 Lecture 20 EECS 470 Slide 2 © Wenisch 2007 ‐‐ Portions © Austin, Brehob, Falsafi, Hill, Hoe, What is Binary TranslationLipasti, Shen, Smith, Sohi, Tyson, Vijaykumar TkiTaking a binary executbltable from a source ISA and generate a new executable in a target ISA such that the new executable has exactly the same functional behavior as the original Same ISA ⇒ Optimization compiler instruction scheduling is a restricted form of translation re‐optim iz ing old binar ies for new, btbut ISA‐compatible, hdhardware Reoptimization can improve performance regardless whether implementation details are exposed by the ISA Across ISAs ⇒ Overcoming binary compatibility two processors are “binary compatible” if they can run the same set of binaries (from BIOS to OS to applications) Strong economic incentive How to get all of the popular software to run on my new processor? How to get my software to run on all of the popular
    [Show full text]
  • Binary Translation Using Peephole Superoptimizers
    Binary Translation Using Peephole Superoptimizers Sorav Bansal Alex Aiken Computer Systems Lab Computer Systems Lab Stanford University Stanford University [email protected] [email protected] Abstract tecture performance for compute-intensive applica- We present a new scheme for performing binary trans- tions. lation that produces code comparable to or better than 2. Because the instruction sets of modern machines existing binary translators with much less engineering tend to be large and idiosyncratic, just writing the effort. Instead of hand-coding the translation from one translation rules from one architecture to another instruction set to another, our approach automatically is a significant engineering challenge, especially if learns translation rules using superoptimization tech- there are significant differences in the semantics of niques. We have implemented a PowerPC-x86 binary the two instruction sets. This problem is exacer- translator and report results on small and large compute- bated by the need to perform optimizations wher- intensive benchmarks. When compared to the native ever possible to minimize problem (1). compiler, our translated code achieves median perfor- mance of 67% on large benchmarks and in some small 3. Because high-performancetranslations must exploit stress tests actually outperforms the native compiler. We architecture-specific semantics to maximize perfor- also report comparisons with the open source binary mance, it is challenging to design a binary translator translator Qemu and a commercial tool, Apple's Rosetta. that can be quickly retargeted to new architectures. We consistently outperform the former and are compara- One popular approach is to design a common inter- ble to or faster than the latter on all but one benchmark.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Binary Translation ∗
    Dynamic Binary Translation ∗ Mark Probst CD Laboratory for Compilation Techniques http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/schani/ Abstract get platform, or dynamically, by translating code on the fly. For von Neumann architectures, where This paper presents an overview of dynamic binary code and data reside in the same memory, static bi- translation. Dynamic binary translation is the pro- nary translation is never a complete solution, due to cess of translating code for one instruction set ar- problems such as dynamic linking and self-modifying chitecture to code for another on the fly, i.e., dy- code. Dynamic binary translation overcomes these namically. Dynamic binary translators are used for problems, while at the same time creating new ones. emulation, migration, and recently for the economic Most prominently, dynamic binary translators must implementation of complex instruction set architec- be fast. Otherwise the translation overhead would be tures. higher than the cost of running the translated code. Most of the problems occuring in dynamic binary This paper discusses the most important issues translation are discussed and solutions are presented arising in the design of a dynamic binary transla- and weighed against each other. tor. We will use the terms “foreign” and “native” to Finally, the dynamic binary translator bintrans, distinguish between the platform which is to be em- developed by the author, is presented. ulated and the platform on which the emulator is to be run. 1 Introduction The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 de- scribes the differences between emulating a whole Binary translation is the process of translating ma- hardware platform and emulating the user-level envi- chine code (binaries) from one instruction set archi- ronment which an application sees.
    [Show full text]