I was thinking that sometime in Jan or (probably more realistically Feb), we should try to actually release m5 2.0. I know that this is largely symbolic, but it's something that we should do. That said, we should try to get all of the TODOs and bugs in the database up to date over the next few weeks and try to determine what exactly is required for 2.0.
Any opinions? Does anyone agree? Nate On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Flyspray <m5-dev@m5sim.org> wrote: > THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE, DO NOT REPLY. > > A new Flyspray task has been opened. Details are below. > > User who did this: - Ali Saidi (saidi) > > Attached to Project - M5 Bugs > Summary - glibc reads /proc/meminfo and that can effect simulation > Task Type - Bug > Category - Global/Other > Status - New > Assigned To - > Operating System - All > Severity - High > Priority - Normal > Reported Version - 2.0beta5 > Due in Version - > Due Date - Undecided > Details - The 20.parser benchmark tends to fail because glibc reads > /proc/meminfo to determine how much memory is available in the system. > qsort() uses that information to choose an algorithm to use thus > depending on the host system, the guest can make a different choice. > Ultimately, we need to provide a fake /proc/meminfo on open() syscalls > that either has some generic info or better yet has the correct > information for the simulated system. > > More information can be found at the following URL: > http://www.m5sim.org/flyspray/task/326 > > You are receiving this message because you have requested it from the > Flyspray bugtracking system. You can be removed from future > notifications by visiting the URL shown above. > > _______________________________________________ > m5-dev mailing list > m5-dev@m5sim.org > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev > > _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
