Does Lisa's change always create a cpu 0? Is there a cpu 0 that is  
always running?  Otherwise, the only issue I see is that CPU 0 might  
not be active at the moment and thus you would never hit the event  
(e.g. if you switched out cpu 0 for something else).

Ali



On Dec 16, 2008, at 12:22 PM, Lisa Hsu wrote:

> Yes, that would work too.  Probably a better solution for this  
> case.  It feels not as "pretty", but I suppose that doesn't matter.   
> I guess I like symmetry too much.
>
> Lisa
>
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Steve Reinhardt <[email protected]>  
> wrote:
> Is there a reason why we schedule an event on all the cpus?  Would it
> work just to schedule the event on cpu 0?
>
> Steve
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Lisa Hsu <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Try the attached patch.
> >
> > To anyone interested:
> >
> > for the initial switch from atomic to timing is set at
> > cpu[i].max_insts_any_thread = 1, for all cpu=i.  the idea for
> > max_insts_any_thread is that when the first cpu hits that value,  
> an exit
> > event is scheduled - but since in this case all N cores hit 1 in  
> the exact
> > same cycle, 4 exit events are scheduled.
> >
> > so after the switch to timing, the first exit event has been dealt  
> with but
> > there are still 3 more, which essentially kill your attempts to  
> drain.
> >
> > this is a pretty silly fix, making the initial atomic phase last  
> 100 insts
> > just to reduce the probability that this will never happen again,  
> but
> > doesn't rigorously remove that possibility.  if anyone has a  
> better idea of
> > how to fix this let me know.
> >
> > Lisa
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:44 AM, Lisa Hsu <[email protected]>  
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm working on this.  Stay tuned.
> >>
> >> Lisa
> >>
> >> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 7:50 PM, Eduardo Olmedo Sanchez
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> These are the changes that I did to the fs.py file:
> >>>
> >>> np = options.num_cpus = 4
> >>>
> >>> test_sys.l2 = L2Cache(size = '4MB', assoc = 4, latency = '30ns')
> >>>
> >>>  test_sys.cpu[i].addPrivateSplitL1Caches(L1Cache(size = '64kB',  
> assoc
> >>> = 2, latency = '2ns'),
> >>>                                                L1Cache(size =  
> '64kB',
> >>> assoc = 2, latency = '2ns'))
> >>>
> >>> I did not do any other changes to the source code.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]>  
> wrote:
> >>> > Have you changed the default configuration any? It appears  
> from your
> >>> > command line that you would only get one cpu.
> >>> >
> >>> > Ali
> >>> >
> >>> > On Dec 12, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Bob Nagel wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Hello Ali,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> What do you mean with devices?, if you are talking about if I  
> do any
> >>> >> changes something in the code of the simulator, I have not  
> done any
> >>> >> changes. The value of event->getCount() is 4.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 2008/12/11 Ali Saidi <[email protected]>:
> >>> >>> It looks like a serialization bug to me. What devices are  
> you using?
> >>> >>> Just the defaults? Can you print out event->getCount() to  
> see what
> >>> >>> the
> >>> >>> value is? i imagine that some object is double executing a  
> drain
> >>> >>> event, but the count would say for sure.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Ali
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Dec 11, 2008, at 9:30 PM, Bob Nagel wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>> Hello I am getting this error when I am running a  
> simulation in FS
> >>> >>>> this is what I am doing:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> I start the simulation in atomic model to load linux and I  
> take a
> >>> >>>> checkpoint to keep simulating in detail model when the  
> script starts
> >>> >>>> running:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> This is the command to take the checkpoint
> >>> >>>> ./build/ALPHA_FS/m5.opt -d  ./tmp/output  configs/example/ 
> fs.py -b
> >>> >>>> MyBench --checkpoint-dir=./checkpoint/
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> This is my rcS file:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> #!/bin/sh
> >>> >>>> /sbin/m5 checkpoint
> >>> >>>> /sbin/m5 switchcpu
> >>> >>>> /sbin/m5 dumpstats
> >>> >>>> /sbin/m5 resetstats
> >>> >>>> cd /parsec/install/bin
> >>> >>>> ./freqmine /parsec/install/inputs/freqmine/kosarak_250k.dat  
> 220
> >>> >>>> echo "DONE :D"
> >>> >>>> /sbin/m5 exit
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> And when I restore from the checkpoint with this command I  
> get this
> >>> >>>> error:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> ./build/ALPHA_FS/m5.opt -d  ./tmp/output  configs/example/ 
> fs.py -b
> >>> >>>> MyBench  --caches --l2cache -s -w 200000000000 -r 1
> >>> >>>> --checkpoint-dir=./checkpoint/
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> switching cpus
> >>> >>>> Switch at instruction count:0
> >>> >>>> info: Entering event queue @ 1815525533500.  Starting  
> simulation...
> >>> >>>> Switching CPUS @ cycle = 1815525533500
> >>> >>>> Simulation ends instruction count:0
> >>> >>>> info: Entering event queue @ 1815525533500.  Starting  
> simulation...
> >>> >>>> m5.opt: build/ALPHA_FS/python/swig/pyevent.cc:84: void
> >>> >>>> cleanupCountedDrain(Event*): Assertion `event->getCount()  
> == 0'
> >>> >>>> failed.
> >>> >>>> Program aborted at cycle 1815525533500
> >>> >>>> Aborted
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> In my script I am running the simulation with 4 cpus, but the
> >>> >>>> thing is
> >>> >>>> that when I put only 1 cpu the simulation runs without any
> >>> >>>> problem, is
> >>> >>>> this a bug of the simulator?. I am using the latest stable  
> version
> >>> >>>> from three weeks ago. And another thing when I restore from  
> the
> >>> >>>> checkpoint I get many warns like this one:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> warn: Not unserializing
> >>> >>>> 'system.switch_cpus_10.fuPool.FUList2.opList2': no section  
> found in
> >>> >>>> checkpoint.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Thanks.
> >>> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>> >>>> m5-users mailing list
> >>> >>>> [email protected]
> >>> >>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> >>> m5-users mailing list
> >>> >>> [email protected]
> >>> >>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
> >>> >>>
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> m5-users mailing list
> >>> >> [email protected]
> >>> >> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > m5-users mailing list
> >>> > [email protected]
> >>> > http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
> >>> >
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> m5-users mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > m5-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> m5-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> m5-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users

_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users

Reply via email to