Roofline model

Work

The work W denotes the number of operations performed by a given kernel or application. This metric may refer to any type of operation, from number of array points updated per second, to number of integer operations per second, to number of floating point operations per second (FLOPS), and the choice of one or another is driven by convenience. In the majority of the cases however, W is expressed as FLOPS.

Note that the work W is a property of the given kernel or application and thus depend just partially on the platform characteristics.

Memory traffic

The memory traffic Q denotes the number of bytes of memory transfers incurred during the execution of the kernel or application. In contrast to W , Q is heavily dependent on the properties of the chosen platform, such as for instance the structure of the cache hierarchy.

Arithmetic intensity

The arithmetic intensity I , also referred to as operational intensity, is the ratio of the work W to the memory traffic Q :

Naïve Roofline

The naïve Roofline is obtained by applying simple bound and bottleneck analysis. In this formulation of the Roofline model, there are only two parameters: peak performance and peak bandwidth of the specific architecture; and one variable: arithmetic intensity. The peak performance, in general expressed as GFLOPS, can be usually derived from architectural manuals, while the peak bandwidth, that references to peak DRAM bandwidth to be specific, is instead obtained via benchmarking. The resulting plot, in general with both axes in logarithmic scale, is then derived by the following formula:

A given kernel or application is then characterized by a point given by its arithmetic intensity I (on the x-axis). The attainable performance P is then computed by drawing a vertical line that hits the Roofline curve. Hence. the kernel or application is said to be memory-bound if I ≤ π / β . Conversely, if I ≥ π / β , the computation is said to be compute-bound.

Adding ceilings to the model

The naïve Roofline provides just an upper bound (the theoretical maximum) to performance. Although it can still give useful insights on the attainable performance, it does not provide a complete picture of what is actually limiting it. If for instance the considered kernel or application performs far below the Roofline, it might be useful to capture other performance ceilings, other than simple peak bandwidth and performance, to better guide the programmer on which optimization to implement, or even to assess the suitability of the architecture used with respect to the analyzed kernel or application. The added ceilings impose then a limit on the attainable performance that is below the actual Roofline, and indicate that the kernel or application cannot break through anyone of these celining without first performing the associated optimization.

The Roofline plot can be expanded upon three different aspects: communication, adding the bandwidth ceilings; computation, adding the so-called in-core ceilings; and locality, adding the locality walls.

Bandwidth ceilings

The bandwidth ceilings are bandwidth diagonals placed below the idealized peak bandwidth diagonal. Their existence is due to the lack of some kind of memory related architectural optimization, such as cache coherence, or software optimization, such as poor exposure of concurrency (that in turn limit bandwidth usage).

In-core ceilings

The in-core ceilings are roofline-like curve beneath the actual roofline that may be present due to the lack of some form of parallelism. These ceilings effectively limit how high performance can reach. Performance cannot exceed an in-core ceiling until the underlying lack of parallelism is expressed and exploited. The ceilings can be also derived from architectural optimization manuals other than benchmarks.

Locality walls

If the ideal assumption that arithmetic intensity is solely a function of the kernel is removed, and the cache topology - and therefore cache misses - is taken into account, the arithmetic intensity clearly becomes dependent on a combination of kernel and architecture. This may result in a degradation in performance depending on the balance between the resultant arithmetic intensity and the ridge point. Unlike "proper" ceilings, the resulting lines on the Roofline plot are vertical barriers through which arithmetic intensity cannot pass without optimization. For this reason, they are referenced to as locality walls or arithmetic intensity walls.

Extension of the model

Since its introduction, the model has been further extended to account for a broader set of metrics and hardware-related bottlenecks. Already available in literature there are extensions that take into account the impact of NUMA organization of memory, of out-of-order execution, of memory latencies, and to model at a finer grain the cache hierarchy in order to better understand what is actually limiting performance and drive the optimization process.

Also, the model has been extended to better suit specific architectures and the related characteristics, such as FPGAs.