Paper detail

The complexity gap in the static analysis of cache accesses grows if procedure calls are added

The static analysis of cache accesses consists in correctly predicting which accesses are hits or misses. While there exist good exact and approximate analyses for caches implementing the least recently used (LRU) replacement policy, such analyses were harder to find for other replacement policies. A theoretical explanation was found: for an appropriate setting of analysis over control-flow graphs, cache analysis is PSPACE-complete for all common replacement policies (FIFO, PLRU, NMRU) except for LRU, for which it is only NP-complete. In this paper, we show that if procedure calls are added to the control flow, then the gap widens: analysis remains NP-complete for LRU, but becomes EXPTIME-complete for the three other policies. For this, we improve on earlier results on the complexity of reachability problems on Boolean programs with procedure calls. In addition, for the LRU policy we derive a backtracking algorithm as well as an approach for using it as a last resort after other analyses have failed to conclude.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.