The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
NVBitFI: Dynamic Fault Injection for GPUs
Abstract
GPUs have found wide acceptance in domains such as high-performance computing and autonomous vehicles, which require fast processing of large amounts of data along with provisions for reliability, availability, and safety. A key component of these dependability characteristics is the propagation of errors and their eventual effect on system outputs. In addition to analytical and simulation models, fault injection is an important technique that can evaluate the effect of errors on a complete computing system running the full software stack. However, the complexity of modern GPU systems and workloads challenges existing fault injection tools. Some tools require the recompilation of source code that may not be available, struggle to handle dynamic libraries, lack support for modern GPUs, or add unacceptable performance overheads. We introduce the NVBitFI tool for fault injection into GPU programs. In contrast with existing tools, NVBitFI performs instrumentation of code dynamically and selectively to instrument the minimal set of target dynamic kernels; as it requires no access to source code, NVBitFI provides improvements in performance and usability. The NVBitFI tool is publicly available for download and use at https://github.com/NVlabs/nvbitfi.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The solution we designed is flexible, allowing the framework to integrate a different FI tool (for instance the recent [22], [23] and new ones that will emerge), based on the adopted development environment, to produce the error models required to support the FES appropriately.”
From Fast and Accurate Error Simulation for CNNs Against Soft Errors (2023) · cites this paper as [23]
Citations
Cites
Binkert, N., Beckmann, B., Black, G., Reinhardt, S. K., Saidi, A., Basu, A., Hestness, J., Hower, D. R., Krishna, T., Sardashti, S., et al. (2011) · ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News · doi:10.1145/2024716.2024718 · Cited by 4,930
Analyzing CUDA workloads using a detailed GPU simulator
Bakhoda, A., Yuan, G. L., Fung, W. W. L., et al. (2009) · IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software (ISPASS) · doi:10.1109/ispass.2009.4919648 · Cited by 1,676
Mukherjee, S. S., Weaver, C. T., Emer, J., Reinhardt, S. K., & Austin, T. M. (2003) · Cited by 840
Mukherjee, S. S., Weaver, C. T., Emer, J., Reinhardt, S. K., & Austin, T. (2003) · IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO) · doi:10.1109/micro.2003.1253181 · Cited by 656
Ubal, R., Jang, B., Mistry, P., et al. (2012) · International Conference on Parallel Architectures and Compilation Techniques · doi:10.1145/2370816.2370865 · Cited by 434
SASSIFI: An architecture-level fault injection tool for GPU application resilience evaluation
Hari, S. K. S., Tsai, T., Stephenson, M., Keckler, S. W., & Emer, J. (2017) · 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software (ISPASS) · doi:10.1109/ispass.2017.7975296 · Cited by 181
Self-citationVilla, O., Stephenson, M., Nellans, D. W., & Keckler, S. W. (2019) · IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO) · doi:10.1145/3352460.3358307 · Cited by 169
Self-citationGPU-Qin: A methodology for evaluating the error resilience of GPGPU applications
Fang, B., Pattabiraman, K., Ripeanu, M., & Gurumurthi, S. (2014) · 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software (ISPASS) · doi:10.1109/ispass.2014.6844486 · Cited by 142
ML-Based Fault Injection for Autonomous Vehicles: A Case for Bayesian Fault Injection
Jha, S., Banerjee, S. S., Tsai, T. K., Hari, S. K. S., Sullivan, M. B., Kalbarczyk, Z., Keckler, S. W., & Iyer, R. K. (2019) · International Conference on Dependable Systems & Networks/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/dsn.2019.00025 · Cited by 128
Self-citationHauberk: Lightweight Silent Data Corruption Error Detector for GPGPU
Yim, K. S., Pham, C., Saleheen, M. U., et al. (2011) · Proceedings - IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium · doi:10.1109/ipdps.2011.36 · Cited by 98
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- 2021, PTX Parallel Thread Execution ISA Version 1 4
- 2021, CUDA-GDB
- 2021, CUDA Parallel Computing Platform
- 2021, CUDA Binary Utilities
- 2021, GREEN500 LIST - NOVEMBER 2020
- 2021, TOP500 LIST - NOVEMBER 2020
- 2021, Whitepaper Introducing AMD CDNA Architecture - The All-New AMD GPU Architecture for the Modern Era of HPC & AI
Cited by
Cross-Layer Reliability Evaluation and Efficient Hardening of Large Vision Transformers Models
Roquet, L., Fernandes dos Santos, F., Rech, P., Traiola, M., Sentieys, O., & Kritikakou, A. (2024) · Proceedings of the 61st ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference · doi:10.1145/3649329.3655688 · Cited by 16
Fast and Accurate Error Simulation for CNNs Against Soft Errors
Bolchini, C., Cassano, L., Miele, A., & Toschi, A. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Computers · doi:10.1109/tc.2022.3184274 · Cited by 1
“The solution we designed is flexible, allowing the framework to integrate a different FI tool (for instance the recent [22], [23] and new ones that will emerge), based on the adopted development environment, to produce the error models required to support the FES appropriately.”
Method
Metadata
- Authors
- Tsai, T., Hari, S. K. S., Sullivan, M., Villa, O., & Keckler, S. W.
- Affiliations
- Nvidia (United Kingdom) (GB)
- Venue
- 2021 51st Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2021-06
- Pages
- 284-291
- ISSN
- 1530-0889 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3187552919
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 14.10
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- International Conference on Dependable Systems & Networks/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Distributed systems and fault tolerance
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Parallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Radiation Effects in Electronics
- Keywords
- fault injection tool, dynamic instrumentation, GPU kernels, dependability, error propagation, performance overhead
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
