Postponed Binary Translation for Execution Overhead
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional dynamic binary translation (DBT) and instrumentation (DBI) frameworks incur significant overhead, doubling the execution time of programs due to the need for translation and emulation of entire executable files, making them inefficient for testing and debugging.
Innovation Solution
The method postpones DBI/DBT until a point of interest is reached, allowing portions of the process to run in native mode until then, setting hooks to transfer control for translation and instrumentation only when necessary, thereby reducing unnecessary overhead.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If DBT and DBI are performed on the entire executable from the beginning, then complete coverage for testing and debugging is achieved, but execution time is doubled due to translation and emulation overhead
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies preliminary action by setting up hooks in advance at specific locations in the binary executable before execution begins. These hooks are prepared during the initialization phase but do not activate DBT/DBI until the program reaches predetermined points of interest, allowing the system to be ready for instrumentation while avoiding premature overhead.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent segments the executable program into different phases: an initial phase that runs natively without instrumentation, and subsequent phases that are instrumented when reaching points of interest. This segmentation allows critical early initialization code to execute efficiently while still enabling comprehensive analysis of later execution phases.
2Loss of time
If DBT and DBI are postponed until a point of interest is reached, then execution time is improved by reducing overhead, but instrumentation coverage is reduced for code executed before the point of interest
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements dynamics by making the instrumentation state changeable during execution. The system dynamically transitions from a non-instrumented state to an instrumented state when points of interest are reached, allowing the instrumentation coverage to adapt based on execution progress rather than being fixed at the beginning.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent uses hooks as intermediary mechanisms that bridge the gap between native execution and instrumented execution. These hooks are embedded in the binary at specific locations and serve as trigger points that initiate DBT/DBI only when the program flow reaches them, acting as mediators that control when instrumentation begins.
3Measurement precision
If the entire program is translated and emulated, then comprehensive analysis is achieved, but the overhead doubles the execution time
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by applying different execution modes to different parts of the program: early initialization code executes in native mode for high performance, while later code reaches instrumented sections for comprehensive analysis. This allows each section to have the quality appropriate to its needs rather than forcing uniform treatment.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements partial action by applying DBT/DBI only to specific portions of the program from points of interest onward, rather than to the entire executable. This partial application of instrumentation achieves sufficient analysis coverage for most practical purposes while avoiding the excessive overhead of complete program translation.
Data Source
AI summary
Dynamic binary instrumentation (DBI) or dynamic binary translation (DBT) of an examined process can be postponed until a point of interest is reached. Portions of the examined process can be run in native mode until the point of interest is reached. Upon reaching the point of interest, DBI and/or DBT can be performed.