It failed in the regression on zizzer 3 days ago and it passed today. The only difference between those two repos is some different copyright text in comments, so it I would guess initialized variable or something?
Ali On Jun 8, 2008, at 3:34 PM, Gabe Black wrote: > I only have access to one machine at the moment (my laptop), so if you > could find two computers where this passes and doesn't at least > semi-repeatably and tracediff them, I might be able figure this out in > the near future. > > Gabe > > Gabe Black wrote: >> Hopefully not. I'd say it's unlikely but I definitely wouldn't say >> it's >> impossible. For that few of instructions it might be fstat or >> something >> like that passing through some host state which changes execution >> in the >> guest slightly. I think I had problems with parser behaving strangely >> before as well either in x86 or in SPARC, although I unfortunately >> don't >> remember very well. I sort of remember that the regressions failed >> for >> the same version the outputs came from and on the same machine >> which I >> may have mentioned in a changeset comment when I reupdated them. The >> reason I think uninitialized state is unlikely is that there aren't >> that >> many microops that things are built from, and for the most part >> that's >> about as far as the manually written C++ gets. There are a lot of >> moving >> parts, though, so I wouldn't rule out that some combination of stuff >> makes something not get initialized. >> >> Gabe >> >> Ali Saidi wrote: >>> I ran a full regression of the new tree manually. The only thing >>> that >>> reported a difference was x86/parser. That particular benchmarks >>> seems >>> to change it stats by 20 instructions kind of frequently. There must >>> be some uninitialized state or something about 32bit vs 64bit >>> compiles? >>> >>> Ali >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> m5-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> m5-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev > > _______________________________________________ > m5-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev > _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
