MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414270444 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3610893

P4THLS: A Templated HLS Framework to Automate Efficient Mapping of P4 Data-Plane Applications to FPGAs

2025· article· en· W4414270444 on OpenAlexafffund
Mostafa Abbasmollaei, Tarek Ould‐Bachir, Yvon Savaria

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsStatistics CanadaPolytechnique MontréalJDA Software (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayPacket processingLatency (audio)Key (lock)Network packetThroughputHigh-level synthesisNetwork processorArchitecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rising demand for high-bandwidth, low-latency network processing has led to a significant shift towards programmable data planes. The P4 language enables network operators to define packet processing pipelines flexibly. However, efficiently deploying P4-defined applications onto Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) remains a complex task due to the low-level hardware design requirements. This paper introduces P4THLS, a templated high-level synthesis framework that converts P4 data-plane applications into synthesizable C++ code for FPGA deployment. Key contributions include an automatic design process, a templated data structure and bus width, and unified memory management techniques. The proposed P4THLS architecture is evaluated through experiments, showing significant improvements in throughput, latency, and resource utilization over existing FPGA-based packet processing methods. The experiments demonstrate that P4THLS achieves up to 143.3 Gbps throughput with a 512-bit bus and 76.5 Gbps with a 256-bit bus, supports match-action tables with up to 64K entries, and sustains sub-50-cycle processing latency at 250 MHz, with end-to-end latencies of around 8 μs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0060.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207