If that's restricted to x86 parser I wrote an email about that earlier. I don't know exactly what's wrong, but if you can get two machines to pass and fail at the same time and send me a tracediff it would really help. I don't think this is something that should hold back the release of the repository since x86 isn't quite ready for prime time yet anyway.
Gabe Ali Saidi wrote: > 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 _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
