-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2978/#review6797
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


LGTM.

- Jason Power


On July 18, 2015, 9:20 p.m., Lena Olson wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2978/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 18, 2015, 9:20 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Repository: gem5
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Changeset 10924:752540bf5605
> ---------------------------
> ruby: Add missing block deallocations in MOESI_hammer
> 
> Some blocks in MOESI hammer were not getting deallocated when they were set to
> an idle state (e.g. by invalidate or other_getx/s messages).  While 
> functionally
> correct, this caused some bad effects on performance, such as blocks in I in 
> the
> L1s getting sent to the L2 upon eviction, in turn evicting valid blocks.  
> Also,
> if a valid block was in LRU, that block could be evicted rather than a block 
> in
> I.  This patch adds in the missing deallocations.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/mem/protocol/MOESI_hammer-cache.sm 5fe05690d03d 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2978/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> I ran the ruby random tester with 4 cores and did not encounter any errors 
> caused by this patch.  I also ran some multiprogrammed workload mixes; 
> sim_ticks can be misleading for multiprogrammed workloads so take this with a 
> large grain of salt, but the simulated runtime was consistently 20-30% less.  
> For ruby tester (+increased cache size+assoc to cause the wrong blocks 
> getting evicted) I see more like 2% improvement.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lena Olson
> 
>

_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to