1. Spring ’05 Independent Study Midterm Review Hans Sherburne HCS Research Laboratory University of Florida

2. 2 Proposed Project Performance Analysis Tool Evaluation  Purpose Obtain information regarding existing tools to assist in design of new tool for UPC/SHMEM  Problem Evaluating performance is important, but inadequately supported for UPC/SHMEM  Need for Solution Desire to learn from the mistakes and successes of others  Benefits of Solution The information procured through evaluating existing tools will guide the development of a new one.

3. 3 Accomplishments achieved while working with Adam Initially, I collaborated with Adam to develop a consistent approach to evaluating tools, while learning from his experience  Testing Plan (1/10) Described general testing strategy Devised testing criteria for previously selected features  PAT testing suite (1/20) Assembled a collection of programs to serve as input to tools being reviewed  Overhead in tracing  Effectiveness in analyzing various performance bottlenecks.  Performance Analysis Tool List (1/21) Researched and assembled list of existing tools, and useful data Selected most interesting tools to evaluate  MPE/Jumpshot Evaluation (1/25) Evaluated functionality of Jumpshot (visualization)  Dimemas/Paraver/MPITrace (2/17) Evaluated functionality of Paraver (visualization)

4. 4 Accomplishments achieved while working independently Recently, I’ve branched off on my own  mpiP Evaluation (2/17) Evaluated the functionality of mpiP (profiling) Not originally scheduled for review, but included for it’s simplicity and effectiveness in display of statistical information  Intel Trace Analyzer/Trace Collector Evaluation (3/15) Evaluation of the functionality of Trace Collector for data collection Evaluation of the functionality of Trace Analyzer for visual display. Will present this today!

5. 5 Proposal Gantt Chart

6. 6 Difficulties Learning many new skills and concepts, while putting them to use. Tool Evaluation  It is tough to gauge how long an evaluation will take before doing it. MPI  It is hard to judge the importance of some tool features without knowing how a “real” user would use it. UPC  It is hard to judge how well a tool will extend to UPC without a good understanding of the innerworkings UPC. Programming/compiling C  When a problem arises it is tough to determine if it is a problem related to the tool itself, or the environment. Linux  The CLI is a powerful tool, but still fairly new to me. HCS lab environment  Different clusters offer different functionality  Some computer within clusters offer different functionality

7. 7 For the rest of semester Tasks  Evaluate SvPablo  Assist with high-level prototype design  Independent Study Report Goals  Continue to learn more about MPI, and UPC (esp. UPC)  Continue to learn more about working with Linux / C  Continue to make valuable contributions to the UPC Group, and HCS Lab