text: This article examines dynamic energy consumption caused by data during software execution on deeply embedded microprocessors, which can be significant on some devices. In worst-case energy consumption analysis, energy models are used to find the most costly execution path. Taking each instruction’s worst-case energy produces a safe but overly pessimistic upper bound. Algorithms for safe and tight bounds would be desirable. We show that finding exact worst-case energy is NP-hard, and that tight bounds cannot be approximated with guaranteed safety. We conclude that any energy model targeting tightness must either sacrifice safety or accept overapproximation proportional to data-dependent energy.
  @cite_36: Reducing energy consumption has become an important issue in designing hardware and software systems in recent years. Although low power hardware components are critical for reducing energy consumption, the switching activity, which is the main source of dynamic power dissipation in electronic systems, is largely determined by the software running on these systems. In this paper, we present and evaluate several instruction scheduling algorithms that reorder a given sequence of instructions taking into account the energy considerations. We first compare a performance-oriented scheduling technique with three energy-oriented instruction scheduling algorithms from both performance (execution cycles of the resulting schedules) and energy consumption points of view. Then, we propose three scheduling algorithms that consider energy and performance at the same time. Our experimentation with these scheduling techniques shows that the best scheduling from the performance perspective is not necessarily the best scheduling from the energy perspective. Further, scheduling techniques that consider both energy and performance simultaneously are found to be desirable, that is, these techniques are quite successful in reducing energy consumption and their performance (in terms of execution cycles) is comparable to that of a pure performance-oriented scheduling. We also illuminate the inherent approximations and difficulties in building energy models for enabling energy-aware instruction scheduling and explore alternative options using cycle-accurate energy simulator. The simulation results show that the energy-oriented scheduling reduces energy consumption by up to 30 compared to the performance-oriented scheduling.
summary: Switching between instructions is a notable contributor to energy consumption, which can be controlled through the order in which instructions are executed. Techniques have been developed to reduce consumption through instruction scheduling @cite_36 , but this is known to be an NP-hard problem. Instruction scheduling uses pre-computed costs of switching between instructions to determine an optimal static schedule. It does not consider the operands to instructions or any cost that does not have a fixed value.