Hardware implementation of intelligent systems

interior, interior vie

A Visual Environment for Real-Time Image Processing in Hardware (VERTIPH)

Real-time video processing is an image-processing application that is ideally suited to implementation on FPGAs. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of a number of existing languages and hardware compilers that have been developed for specifying image processing algorithms on FPGAs. We propose VERTIPH, a new multiple-view visual language that avoids the weaknesses we identify. A VERTIPH design incorporates three different views, each tailored to a different aspect of the image processing system under development; an overall architectural view, a computational view, and a resource and scheduling view

Unifying software and hardware of multithreaded reconfigurable applications within operating system processes

Novel reconfigurable System-on-Chip (SoC) devices offer combining software with application-specific hardware accelerators to speed up applications. However, by mixing user software and user hardware, principal programming abstractions and system-software commodities are usually lost, since hardware accelerators (1) do not have execution context —it is typically the programmer who is supposed to provide it, for each accelerator, (2) do not have virtual memory abstraction —it is again programmer who shall communicate data from user software space to user hardware, even if it is usually burdensome (or sometimes impossible!), (3) cannot invoke system services (e.g., to allocate memory, open files, communicate), and (4) are not easily portable —they depend mostly on system-level interfacing, although they logically belong to the application level. We introduce a unified Operating System (OS) process for codesigned reconfigurable applications that provides (1) unified memory abstraction for software and hardware application parts, (2) execution transfers from software to hardware and vice versa, thus enabling hardware accelerators to use systems services and callback other software and hardware functions, and (3) multithreaded execution of multiple software and hardware threads. The unified OS process ensures portability of codesigned applications, by providing standardised means of interfacing. Having just-another abstraction layer usually affects performance: we show that the runtime optimisations in the system layer supporting the unified OS process can minimise the performance loss and even outperform typical approaches. The unified OS process also fosters unrestricted automated synthesis of software to hardware, thus allowing unlimited migration of application components. We demonstrate the advantages of the unified OS process in practice, for Linux systems running on Xilinx Virtex-II Pro and Altera Excalibur reconfigurable devices

Using embedded hardware monitor cores in critical computer systems

The integration of FPGA devices in many different architectures and services makes monitoring and real time detection of errors an important concern in FPGA system design. A monitor is a tool, or a set of tools, that facilitate analytic measurements in observing a given system. The goal of these observations is usually the performance analysis and optimisation, or the surveillance of the system. However, System-on-Chip (SoC) based designs leave few points to attach external tools such as logic analysers. Thus, an embedded error detection core that allows observation of critical system nodes (such as processor cores and buses) should enforce the operation of the FPGA-based system, in order to prevent system failures. The core should not interfere with system performance and must ensure timely detection of errors. This thesis is an investigation onto how a robust hardware-monitoring module can be efficiently integrated in a target PCI board (with FPGA-based application processing features) which is part of a critical computing system. [Continues.

Models, Design Methods and Tools for Improved Partial Dynamic Reconfiguration

Partial dynamic reconfiguration of FPGAs has attracted high attention from both academia and industry in recent years. With this technique, the functionality of the programmable devices can be adapted at runtime to changing requirements. The approach allows designers to use FPGAs more efficiently: E. g. FPGA resources can be time-shared between different functions and the functions itself can be adapted to changing workloads at runtime. Thus partial dynamic reconfiguration enables a unique combination of software-like flexibility and hardware-like performance. Still there exists no common understanding on how to assess the overhead introduced by partial dynamic reconfiguration. This dissertation presents a new cost model for both the runtime and the memory overhead that results from partial dynamic reconfiguration. It is shown how the model can be incorporated into all stages of the design optimization for reconfigurable hardware. In particular digital circuits can be mapped onto FPGAs such that only small fractions of the hardware must be reconfigured at runtime, which saves time, memory, and energy. The design optimization is most efficient if it is applied during high level synthesis. This book describes how the cost model has been integrated into a new high level synthesis tool. The tool allows the designer to trade-off FPGA resource use versus reconfiguration overhead. It is shown that partial reconfiguration causes only small overhead if the design is optimized with regard to reconfiguration cost. A wide range of experimental results is provided that demonstrates the benefits of the applied method.:1 Introduction 1 1.1 Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Reconfigurable System on a Chip (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Anatomy of an Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 RSOC Design Characteristics and Trade-offs . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Classification of Reconfigurable Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.1 Partial Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.2 Runtime Reconfiguration (RTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Multi-Context Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Fine-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Coarse-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.3 Reconfigurable Computing Specific Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Overview of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Reconfigurable Computing Systems – Background 17 2.1 Examples for RSOCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.2 Partially Reconfigurable FPGAs: Xilinx Virtex Device Family . . . . . . 20 2.2.1 Virtex-II/Virtex-II Pro Logic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.2 Reconfiguration Architecture and Reconfiguration Control . . 21 2.3 Methods for Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Behavioural Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.2 Design Entry at Register-Transfer Level (RTL) . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Xilinx Early Access Partial Reconfiguration Design Flow . . . . 26 2.4 Task Management in Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.4.1 Online and Offline Task Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.2 Task Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.3 Task Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.4 Reconfiguration Runtime Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5 Configuration Data Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Evaluation of Reconfigurable Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Energy Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Area Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6.3 Runtime Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.7 Similarity Based Reduction of Reconfiguration Overhead . . . . . . . . 38 2.7.1 Configuration Data Generation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.7.2 Device Mapping Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.7.3 Circuit Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.7.4 Model for Partial Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.8 Contributions of this Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 Runtime Reconfiguration Cost and Optimization Methods 47 3.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 Reconfiguration State Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Reconfiguration Time Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.2.2 Dynamic Configuration Data Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.3 Configuration Cost at Bitstream Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.4 Configuration Cost at Structural Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4.2 Virtual Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.3 Reconfiguration Costs in the VA Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.5 Allocation Functions with Minimal Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . 67 3.5.1 Allocation of Node Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5.2 Direct Allocation of Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.5.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4 Implementation Tools for Reconfigurable Computing 95 4.1 Mapping of Netlists to FPGA Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.1 Mapping to Device Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.2 Connectivity Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 4.1.3 Mapping Variants and Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.4 Mapping of Circuit Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.1.5 Global Interconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 4.1.6 Netlist Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2 Mapping Aware Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2.1 Generalized Node Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.2 Successive Node Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.2.3 Node Allocation with Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . 107 4.2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.3 Netlist Mapping with Minimized Reconfiguration Cost . . . . . . . . . 110 4.3.1 Mapping Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.3.2 Mapping and Packing of Elements into Logic Blocks . . . . . . 112 4.3.3 Logic Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.3.4 Logic Element Selection for Min. Routing Reconfiguration . . 115 4.3.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5 High-Level Synthesis for Reconfigurable Computing 125 5.1 Introduction to HLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.1 HLS Tool Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.2 Realization of the Hardware Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 New Concepts for Task-based Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5.2.1 Multiple Hardware Tasks in one Reconfigurable Module . . . . 132 5.2.2 Multi-Level Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.2.3 Resource Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.3 Datapath Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.1 Task Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.2 Resource Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.3 Resource Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.4 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 5.3.5 Constraints for Scheduling and Resource Binding . . . . . . . . 151 5.4 Reconfiguration Optimized Datapath Implementation . . . . . . . . . . 153 5.4.1 Effects of Scheduling and Binding on Reconfiguration Costs . 153 5.4.2 Strategies for Resource Type Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 5.4.3 Strategies for Resource Instance Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 5.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.1 Summary of Binding Methods and Tool Setup . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.2 Cost Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.5.3 Implementation Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 5.5.4 Benchmark Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5.5.5 Benchmark Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5.5.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 5.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6 Summary and Outlook 185 Bibliography 189 A Simulated Annealing 201Partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration von FPGAs hat in den letzten Jahren große Aufmerksamkeit von Wissenschaft und Industrie auf sich gezogen. Die Technik erlaubt es, die Funktionalität von progammierbaren Bausteinen zur Laufzeit an veränderte Anforderungen anzupassen. Dynamische Rekonfiguration erlaubt es Entwicklern, FPGAs effizienter einzusetzen: z.B. können Ressourcen für verschiedene Funktionen wiederverwendet werden und die Funktionen selbst können zur Laufzeit an veränderte Verarbeitungsschritte angepasst werden. Insgesamt erlaubt partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration eine einzigartige Kombination von software-artiger Flexibilität und hardware-artiger Leistungsfähigkeit. Bis heute gibt es keine Übereinkunft darüber, wie der zusätzliche Aufwand, der durch partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration verursacht wird, zu bewerten ist. Diese Dissertation führt ein neues Kostenmodell für Laufzeit und Speicherbedarf ein, welche durch partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration verursacht wird. Es wird aufgezeigt, wie das Modell in alle Ebenen der Entwurfsoptimierung für rekonfigurierbare Hardware einbezogen werden kann. Insbesondere wird gezeigt, wie digitale Schaltungen derart auf FPGAs abgebildet werden können, sodass nur wenig Ressourcen der Hardware zur Laufzeit rekonfiguriert werden müssen. Dadurch kann Zeit, Speicher und Energie eingespart werden. Die Entwurfsoptimierung ist am effektivsten, wenn sie auf der Ebene der High-Level-Synthese angewendet wird. Diese Arbeit beschreibt, wie das Kostenmodell in ein neuartiges Werkzeug für die High-Level-Synthese integriert wurde. Das Werkzeug erlaubt es, beim Entwurf die Nutzung von FPGA-Ressourcen gegen den Rekonfigurationsaufwand abzuwägen. Es wird gezeigt, dass partielle Rekonfiguration nur wenig Kosten verursacht, wenn der Entwurf bezüglich Rekonfigurationskosten optimiert wird. Eine Anzahl von Beispielen und experimentellen Ergebnissen belegt die Vorteile der angewendeten Methodik.:1 Introduction 1 1.1 Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Reconfigurable System on a Chip (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Anatomy of an Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 RSOC Design Characteristics and Trade-offs . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Classification of Reconfigurable Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.1 Partial Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.2 Runtime Reconfiguration (RTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Multi-Context Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Fine-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Coarse-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.3 Reconfigurable Computing Specific Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Overview of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Reconfigurable Computing Systems – Background 17 2.1 Examples for RSOCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.2 Partially Reconfigurable FPGAs: Xilinx Virtex Device Family . . . . . . 20 2.2.1 Virtex-II/Virtex-II Pro Logic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.2 Reconfiguration Architecture and Reconfiguration Control . . 21 2.3 Methods for Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Behavioural Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.2 Design Entry at Register-Transfer Level (RTL) . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Xilinx Early Access Partial Reconfiguration Design Flow . . . . 26 2.4 Task Management in Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.4.1 Online and Offline Task Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.2 Task Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.3 Task Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.4 Reconfiguration Runtime Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5 Configuration Data Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Evaluation of Reconfigurable Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Energy Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Area Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6.3 Runtime Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.7 Similarity Based Reduction of Reconfiguration Overhead . . . . . . . . 38 2.7.1 Configuration Data Generation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.7.2 Device Mapping Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.7.3 Circuit Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.7.4 Model for Partial Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.8 Contributions of this Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 Runtime Reconfiguration Cost and Optimization Methods 47 3.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 Reconfiguration State Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Reconfiguration Time Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.2.2 Dynamic Configuration Data Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.3 Configuration Cost at Bitstream Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.4 Configuration Cost at Structural Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4.2 Virtual Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.3 Reconfiguration Costs in the VA Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.5 Allocation Functions with Minimal Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . 67 3.5.1 Allocation of Node Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5.2 Direct Allocation of Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.5.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4 Implementation Tools for Reconfigurable Computing 95 4.1 Mapping of Netlists to FPGA Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.1 Mapping to Device Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.2 Connectivity Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 4.1.3 Mapping Variants and Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.4 Mapping of Circuit Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.1.5 Global Interconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 4.1.6 Netlist Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2 Mapping Aware Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2.1 Generalized Node Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.2 Successive Node Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.2.3 Node Allocation with Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . 107 4.2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.3 Netlist Mapping with Minimized Reconfiguration Cost . . . . . . . . . 110 4.3.1 Mapping Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.3.2 Mapping and Packing of Elements into Logic Blocks . . . . . . 112 4.3.3 Logic Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.3.4 Logic Element Selection for Min. Routing Reconfiguration . . 115 4.3.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5 High-Level Synthesis for Reconfigurable Computing 125 5.1 Introduction to HLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.1 HLS Tool Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.2 Realization of the Hardware Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 New Concepts for Task-based Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5.2.1 Multiple Hardware Tasks in one Reconfigurable Module . . . . 132 5.2.2 Multi-Level Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.2.3 Resource Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.3 Datapath Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.1 Task Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.2 Resource Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.3 Resource Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.4 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 5.3.5 Constraints for Scheduling and Resource Binding . . . . . . . . 151 5.4 Reconfiguration Optimized Datapath Implementation . . . . . . . . . . 153 5.4.1 Effects of Scheduling and Binding on Reconfiguration Costs . 153 5.4.2 Strategies for Resource Type Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 5.4.3 Strategies for Resource Instance Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 5.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.1 Summary of Binding Methods and Tool Setup . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.2 Cost Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.5.3 Implementation Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 5.5.4 Benchmark Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5.5.5 Benchmark Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5.5.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 5.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6 Summary and Outlook 185 Bibliography 189 A Simulated Annealing 20

Models, Design Methods and Tools for Improved Partial Dynamic Reconfiguration

Partial dynamic reconfiguration of FPGAs has attracted high attention from both academia and industry in recent years. With this technique, the functionality of the programmable devices can be adapted at runtime to changing requirements. The approach allows designers to use FPGAs more efficiently: E. g. FPGA resources can be time-shared between different functions and the functions itself can be adapted to changing workloads at runtime. Thus partial dynamic reconfiguration enables a unique combination of software-like flexibility and hardware-like performance. Still there exists no common understanding on how to assess the overhead introduced by partial dynamic reconfiguration. This dissertation presents a new cost model for both the runtime and the memory overhead that results from partial dynamic reconfiguration. It is shown how the model can be incorporated into all stages of the design optimization for reconfigurable hardware. In particular digital circuits can be mapped onto FPGAs such that only small fractions of the hardware must be reconfigured at runtime, which saves time, memory, and energy. The design optimization is most efficient if it is applied during high level synthesis. This book describes how the cost model has been integrated into a new high level synthesis tool. The tool allows the designer to trade-off FPGA resource use versus reconfiguration overhead. It is shown that partial reconfiguration causes only small overhead if the design is optimized with regard to reconfiguration cost. A wide range of experimental results is provided that demonstrates the benefits of the applied method.:1 Introduction 1 1.1 Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Reconfigurable System on a Chip (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Anatomy of an Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 RSOC Design Characteristics and Trade-offs . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Classification of Reconfigurable Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.1 Partial Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.2 Runtime Reconfiguration (RTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Multi-Context Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Fine-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Coarse-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.3 Reconfigurable Computing Specific Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Overview of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Reconfigurable Computing Systems – Background 17 2.1 Examples for RSOCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.2 Partially Reconfigurable FPGAs: Xilinx Virtex Device Family . . . . . . 20 2.2.1 Virtex-II/Virtex-II Pro Logic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.2 Reconfiguration Architecture and Reconfiguration Control . . 21 2.3 Methods for Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Behavioural Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.2 Design Entry at Register-Transfer Level (RTL) . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Xilinx Early Access Partial Reconfiguration Design Flow . . . . 26 2.4 Task Management in Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.4.1 Online and Offline Task Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.2 Task Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.3 Task Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.4 Reconfiguration Runtime Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5 Configuration Data Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Evaluation of Reconfigurable Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Energy Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Area Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6.3 Runtime Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.7 Similarity Based Reduction of Reconfiguration Overhead . . . . . . . . 38 2.7.1 Configuration Data Generation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.7.2 Device Mapping Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.7.3 Circuit Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.7.4 Model for Partial Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.8 Contributions of this Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 Runtime Reconfiguration Cost and Optimization Methods 47 3.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 Reconfiguration State Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Reconfiguration Time Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.2.2 Dynamic Configuration Data Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.3 Configuration Cost at Bitstream Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.4 Configuration Cost at Structural Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4.2 Virtual Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.3 Reconfiguration Costs in the VA Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.5 Allocation Functions with Minimal Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . 67 3.5.1 Allocation of Node Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5.2 Direct Allocation of Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.5.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4 Implementation Tools for Reconfigurable Computing 95 4.1 Mapping of Netlists to FPGA Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.1 Mapping to Device Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.2 Connectivity Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 4.1.3 Mapping Variants and Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.4 Mapping of Circuit Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.1.5 Global Interconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 4.1.6 Netlist Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2 Mapping Aware Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2.1 Generalized Node Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.2 Successive Node Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.2.3 Node Allocation with Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . 107 4.2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.3 Netlist Mapping with Minimized Reconfiguration Cost . . . . . . . . . 110 4.3.1 Mapping Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.3.2 Mapping and Packing of Elements into Logic Blocks . . . . . . 112 4.3.3 Logic Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.3.4 Logic Element Selection for Min. Routing Reconfiguration . . 115 4.3.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5 High-Level Synthesis for Reconfigurable Computing 125 5.1 Introduction to HLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.1 HLS Tool Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.2 Realization of the Hardware Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 New Concepts for Task-based Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5.2.1 Multiple Hardware Tasks in one Reconfigurable Module . . . . 132 5.2.2 Multi-Level Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.2.3 Resource Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.3 Datapath Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.1 Task Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.2 Resource Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.3 Resource Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.4 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 5.3.5 Constraints for Scheduling and Resource Binding . . . . . . . . 151 5.4 Reconfiguration Optimized Datapath Implementation . . . . . . . . . . 153 5.4.1 Effects of Scheduling and Binding on Reconfiguration Costs . 153 5.4.2 Strategies for Resource Type Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 5.4.3 Strategies for Resource Instance Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 5.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.1 Summary of Binding Methods and Tool Setup . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.2 Cost Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.5.3 Implementation Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 5.5.4 Benchmark Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5.5.5 Benchmark Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5.5.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 5.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6 Summary and Outlook 185 Bibliography 189 A Simulated Annealing 201Partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration von FPGAs hat in den letzten Jahren große Aufmerksamkeit von Wissenschaft und Industrie auf sich gezogen. Die Technik erlaubt es, die Funktionalität von progammierbaren Bausteinen zur Laufzeit an veränderte Anforderungen anzupassen. Dynamische Rekonfiguration erlaubt es Entwicklern, FPGAs effizienter einzusetzen: z.B. können Ressourcen für verschiedene Funktionen wiederverwendet werden und die Funktionen selbst können zur Laufzeit an veränderte Verarbeitungsschritte angepasst werden. Insgesamt erlaubt partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration eine einzigartige Kombination von software-artiger Flexibilität und hardware-artiger Leistungsfähigkeit. Bis heute gibt es keine Übereinkunft darüber, wie der zusätzliche Aufwand, der durch partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration verursacht wird, zu bewerten ist. Diese Dissertation führt ein neues Kostenmodell für Laufzeit und Speicherbedarf ein, welche durch partielle dynamische Rekonfiguration verursacht wird. Es wird aufgezeigt, wie das Modell in alle Ebenen der Entwurfsoptimierung für rekonfigurierbare Hardware einbezogen werden kann. Insbesondere wird gezeigt, wie digitale Schaltungen derart auf FPGAs abgebildet werden können, sodass nur wenig Ressourcen der Hardware zur Laufzeit rekonfiguriert werden müssen. Dadurch kann Zeit, Speicher und Energie eingespart werden. Die Entwurfsoptimierung ist am effektivsten, wenn sie auf der Ebene der High-Level-Synthese angewendet wird. Diese Arbeit beschreibt, wie das Kostenmodell in ein neuartiges Werkzeug für die High-Level-Synthese integriert wurde. Das Werkzeug erlaubt es, beim Entwurf die Nutzung von FPGA-Ressourcen gegen den Rekonfigurationsaufwand abzuwägen. Es wird gezeigt, dass partielle Rekonfiguration nur wenig Kosten verursacht, wenn der Entwurf bezüglich Rekonfigurationskosten optimiert wird. Eine Anzahl von Beispielen und experimentellen Ergebnissen belegt die Vorteile der angewendeten Methodik.:1 Introduction 1 1.1 Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Reconfigurable System on a Chip (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Anatomy of an Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.1.3 RSOC Design Characteristics and Trade-offs . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.2 Classification of Reconfigurable Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.1 Partial Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.2 Runtime Reconfiguration (RTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.2.3 Multi-Context Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.4 Fine-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.5 Coarse-Grain Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.3 Reconfigurable Computing Specific Design Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.4 Overview of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Reconfigurable Computing Systems – Background 17 2.1 Examples for RSOCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.2 Partially Reconfigurable FPGAs: Xilinx Virtex Device Family . . . . . . 20 2.2.1 Virtex-II/Virtex-II Pro Logic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.2 Reconfiguration Architecture and Reconfiguration Control . . 21 2.3 Methods for Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.1 Behavioural Design Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.2 Design Entry at Register-Transfer Level (RTL) . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.3 Xilinx Early Access Partial Reconfiguration Design Flow . . . . 26 2.4 Task Management in Reconfigurable Computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.4.1 Online and Offline Task Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.2 Task Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4.3 Task Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.4 Reconfiguration Runtime Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5 Configuration Data Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Evaluation of Reconfigurable Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Energy Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Area Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6.3 Runtime Efficiency Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.7 Similarity Based Reduction of Reconfiguration Overhead . . . . . . . . 38 2.7.1 Configuration Data Generation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.7.2 Device Mapping Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.7.3 Circuit Design Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.7.4 Model for Partial Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.8 Contributions of this Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 Runtime Reconfiguration Cost and Optimization Methods 47 3.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 Reconfiguration State Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Reconfiguration Time Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.2.2 Dynamic Configuration Data Overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3.3 Configuration Cost at Bitstream Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.4 Configuration Cost at Structural Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4.2 Virtual Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4.3 Reconfiguration Costs in the VA Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.5 Allocation Functions with Minimal Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . 67 3.5.1 Allocation of Node Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5.2 Direct Allocation of Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.5.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4 Implementation Tools for Reconfigurable Computing 95 4.1 Mapping of Netlists to FPGA Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.1 Mapping to Device Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4.1.2 Connectivity Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 4.1.3 Mapping Variants and Reconfiguration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.4 Mapping of Circuit Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.1.5 Global Interconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 4.1.6 Netlist Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2 Mapping Aware Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.2.1 Generalized Node Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.2 Successive Node Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 4.2.3 Node Allocation with Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . 107 4.2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.3 Netlist Mapping with Minimized Reconfiguration Cost . . . . . . . . . 110 4.3.1 Mapping Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.3.2 Mapping and Packing of Elements into Logic Blocks . . . . . . 112 4.3.3 Logic Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.3.4 Logic Element Selection for Min. Routing Reconfiguration . . 115 4.3.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5 High-Level Synthesis for Reconfigurable Computing 125 5.1 Introduction to HLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.1 HLS Tool Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1.2 Realization of the Hardware Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 New Concepts for Task-based Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5.2.1 Multiple Hardware Tasks in one Reconfigurable Module . . . . 132 5.2.2 Multi-Level Reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.2.3 Resource Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.3 Datapath Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.1 Task Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.3.2 Resource Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.3 Resource Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.3.4 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 5.3.5 Constraints for Scheduling and Resource Binding . . . . . . . . 151 5.4 Reconfiguration Optimized Datapath Implementation . . . . . . . . . . 153 5.4.1 Effects of Scheduling and Binding on Reconfiguration Costs . 153 5.4.2 Strategies for Resource Type Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 5.4.3 Strategies for Resource Instance Binding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 5.5 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.1 Summary of Binding Methods and Tool Setup . . . . . . . . . . 163 5.5.2 Cost Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.5.3 Implementation Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 5.5.4 Benchmark Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5.5.5 Benchmark Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 5.5.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 5.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6 Summary and Outlook 185 Bibliography 189 A Simulated Annealing 20

Dynamically reconfigurable management of energy, performance, and accuracy applied to digital signal, image, and video Processing Applications

There is strong interest in the development of dynamically reconfigurable systems that can meet real-time constraints in energy/power-performance-accuracy (EPA/PPA). In this dissertation, I introduce a framework for implementing dynamically reconfigurable digital signal, image, and video processing systems. The basic idea is to first generate a collection of Pareto-optimal realizations in the EPA/PPA space. Dynamic EPA/PPA management is then achieved by selecting the Pareto-optimal implementations that can meet the real-time constraints. The systems are then demonstrated using Dynamic Partial Reconfiguration (DPR) and dynamic frequency control on FPGAs. The framework is demonstrated on: i) a dynamic pixel processor, ii) a dynamically reconfigurable 1-D digital filtering architecture, and iii) a dynamically reconfigurable 2-D separable digital filtering system. Efficient implementations of the pixel processor are based on the use of look-up tables and local-multiplexes to minimize FPGA resources. For the pixel-processor, different realizations are generated based on the number of input bits, the number of cores, the number of output bits, and the frequency of operation. For each parameters combination, there is a different pixel-processor realization. Pareto-optimal realizations are selected based on measurements of energy per frame, PSNR accuracy, and performance in terms of frames per second. Dynamic EPA/PPA management is demonstrated for a sequential list of real-time constraints by selecting optimal realizations and implementing using DPR and dynamic frequency control. Efficient FPGA implementations for the 1-D and 2-D FIR filters are based on the use a distributed arithmetic technique. Different realizations are generated by varying the number of coefficients, coefficient bitwidth, and output bitwidth. Pareto-optimal realizations are selected in the EPA space. Dynamic EPA management is demonstrated on the application of real-time EPA constraints on a digital video. The results suggest that the general framework can be applied to a variety of digital signal, image, and video processing systems. It is based on the use of offline-processing that is used to determine the Pareto-optimal realizations. Real-time constraints are met by selecting Pareto-optimal realizations pre-loaded in memory that are then implemented efficiently using DPR and/or dynamic frequency control