Could you decode this a little bit? I think that the numbers are mislabeled?
Thanks, Ali On Jan 18, 2012, at 8:07 AM, Gabe Black wrote: > ARM_FS/tests/opt/long/10.linux-boot/arm/linux/realview-o3/ > > compile time: > host_seconds > 840.68 # Real time elapsed on the host > > run time: > host_seconds > 840.02 # Real time elapsed on the host > > > ARM_FS/tests/opt/long/10.linux-boot/arm/linux/realview-o3/ > > compile time: > host_seconds > 34.50 # Real time elapsed on the host > > run time: > host_seconds > 33.11 # Real time elapsed on the host > > > build/X86_SE/tests/opt/long/70.twolf/x86/linux/simple-atomic/ > compile time: > host_seconds > 87.55 # Real time elapsed on the host > host_seconds > 93.78 # Real time elapsed on the host > > run time: > host_seconds > 103.96 # Real time elapsed on the host > host_seconds > 100.22 # Real time elapsed on the host > > > One thing which surprised me is that choosing SE/FS mode at runtime > performed better than choosing it at compile time on ARM_FS, although > there was more overhead on X86_SE. I'm not really sure why that's > happening. It could be an SE vs. FS thing somehow. > > Gabe > _______________________________________________ > 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
