Answers below: > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:gem5-dev- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Nilay Vaish > Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 12:56 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [gem5-dev] Ruby: TraceRecord + CacheWarmup > > A couple of questions that I have been thinking about -- > > 1. I went through the code for TraceRecord. When a RubyRequest is created > using a trace record, the pkt pointer is provided as NULL. It seems to me that > this would lead to something wrong later on when callback takes place. In > particular, RubyPort::ruby_hit_callback() works on the packet pointer > provided in a ruby request. > I think TraceRecord is currently broken. It might be that patch you use for > cache warmup makes changes to TraceRecord that make it work correctly. > Is this true or am I reading the code incorrectly?
The TraceRecord implemented in the cache warmup patch is not broken. The cache warmup patch adds functionality to Sequencer::hitCallback that simply returns when under cache warmup mode. Thus the RubyPort::ruby_hit_callback function is never called. > > 2. I went back and read the discussion on cache warmup that took place in > late June. I am wondering about the need for timing cache warmup. Is it not > possible to simply serialize the state of cache controller like it is done for > other components of gem5? Not if you want to use cache traces across different protocols. Workload generation is a hard, tedious effort. It is important to leverage that work as much as possible and construct checkpoints that are as architecturally independent as possible. Brad > > Thanks > Nilay > _______________________________________________ > gem5-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
