Hi Andreas,

I have one more question for you. tBRUST in all DRAM configurations in gem5
is based on 64-byte cache lines. Some DRAM configurations such as
LPDDR2_S4_1066_x32 has a x32 interface and a burst length of 8 (8 beats per
burst). So in these configurations, two BL8 are needed for a 64-byte memory
request. To account for that, I am adding a new parameter called
bursts_per_request. So, for LPDDR2_S4_1066_x32, bursts_per_request is 2,
while for DDR3_1600_x64, bursts_per_request is 1. Would you let me know
your thoughts on this? Shall I go ahead?

PS: As we discussed earlier, I plan to add parameters such as bus_width in
bits and burst_lenght in beats to my new patch.

Thanks,
Amin


On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> Since we don't support (to my knowledge) different caches with
> different cache line sizes in the same system, perhaps it does make
> sense to make it a parameter on the system level. I don't think it
> should be a compiled constant however.
>
> Ali
>
> On 19.06.2013 11:40,
> Andreas Hansson wrote:
>
> > Hi Amin,
> >
> > I think there are two things
> here:
> >
> > 1. don't use the cache line size as a "unit" in the DRAM
> model. We agree on this and your patch is a good start.
> > 2. Should we
> drop peerBlockSize and put a cache line size parameter (or even
> compile-time constant?) at the system level?
> >
> > Andreas
> >
> > From:
> Amin Farmahini <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> > Date:
> Wednesday, 19 June 2013 11:30
> > To: Andreas Hansson
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> > Cc: Nilay
> Vaish <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, gem5 Developer List
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> > Subject: Re: [gem5-dev]
> Review Request 1927: mem: replacing bytesPerCacheLine with DRAM
> burstLength in SimpleDRAM
> >
> > I agree with dropping peerBlockSize.
> >
> For now, we only support cache line size of 64 (32-byte lines are also
> supported, but in terms of timing they are treated as 64-byte cache
> lines).
> > I don't like the idea of a cache line size parameter to the
> system. We should make DRAM model independent of cache line size. DRAM
> should not care what the cache line size is. DRAM controller deals with
> the memory request size, not the cache line size. Most SoCs are
> connected to devices with different cache line sizes.
> > If the request
> size is the same as dram burst size, then we are fine. If it is larger,
> then we panic. In the future, we can support splitting requests larger
> than 64 bytes.
> > [https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif
> [3]]
> > Forgot to send it to the group.
> >
> > Amin
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 19,
> 2013 at 11:18 AM, Andreas Hansson
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > On
> that note I'd suggest we completely drop the peerBlockSize and the
> >
> "impression" that we can have different cache line size at different
> parts
> > in the system. We could add a cache line size parameter to the
> system.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Andreas
> >
> > On 19/06/2013 11:14, "Nilay
> Vaish" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >> On
> Wed, 19 Jun 2013, Andreas Hansson wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an
> automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1927/#review4448 [1]
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> src/mem/SimpleDRAM.py <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1927/#comment4174 [2]>
> Hi Nilay, You cannot compute this from params as the cache line size is
> determined in the C++ code.
> >> This means that you are assuming what the
> cache line size is. In that case, I would rather have the cache line
> size as a param. -- Nilay
> >
> > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this
> email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
> immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it
> for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank
> you.
> >
> > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any
> attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not
> disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or
> store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> > gem5-dev mailing
> list
> > [email protected]
> > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> [4]
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1927/#review4448
> [2]
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1927/#comment4174
> [3]
> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif
> [4]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to