It does indeed seem suspicious. I got the impression there were only three x86 regressions that did not match?
For ARM valgrind is happy and gcc 4.9 UBSan has nothing to report besides some MiscRegIndex vs IntRegIndex enum mismatches. For x86 there are tons of issues spotted by UBSan (and even more so with Ruby included). Andreas On 20/04/2015 23:20, "Nilay Vaish" <[email protected]> wrote: >On Mon, 20 Apr 2015, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > >> changeset a80d2d716a53 in /z/repo/gem5 >> details: http://repo.gem5.org/gem5?cmd=changeset;node=a80d2d716a53 >> description: >> stats: update a few stats from long O3 runs >> >> Very small changes to iew.predictedNotTakenIncorrect >> and iew.branchMispredicts. Looks like similar updates >> were committed on April 3 (changeset 235ff1c046df), but >> only for the quick tests. >> > >I think we have some memory related bug somewhere. The last time I ran >regression tests, which was about a week ago, the ARM ones worked fine. > >-- >Nilay >_______________________________________________ >gem5-dev mailing list >[email protected] >http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev -- 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. ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ, Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2557590 ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ, Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2548782 _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
