The cmp.py has not been changed from the old one. However some minor
changes (master/slave names) are done while porting to the new
release.

On 4/14/12, Malek Musleh <[email protected]> wrote:
> I missed that, my mistake. I don't know what the cmp.py script is
> doing as I don't have it in my repo, but if you look at the sim_insts
> between the 2 stats file you posted,, there is a big difference:
>
> new: sim_insts                                                    20767049
> old:   sim_insts                                                    39724113
>
> I would make sure the cpu type is not getting overridden somehow when
> you do cpu_type=detailed by atomic/timing or something of the sort.
>
> Malek
>
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Mahmood Naderan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> why?
>> -d is detailed
>>
>>
>> On 4/14/12, Malek Musleh <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Well first of all, you are not making first comparisons, as each of
>>> the runs you are using a different cpu type. So I think you should
>>> start with fixing that parameter first.
>>>
>>> Malek
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Mahmood Naderan <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> For the old one, I use:
>>>> build/X86_SE/m5.fast configs/example/cmp.py  -F 20000000 --maxtick
>>>> 10000000000 -d --caches --l2cache -b h264_sss --prog-interval=1000000
>>>>
>>>> for the new one I use:
>>>> build/X86/m5.fast configs/example/cmp.py --cpu-type=detailed  -F
>>>> 20000000 --maxtick 10000000000 --caches --l2cache -b h264_sss
>>>> --prog-interval=1000000
>>>>
>>>> I attached the configs and stats. Thanks
>>>>
>>>> On 4/14/12, Nilay Vaish <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> So, with 8613:712d8bf07020 you got and IPC of 1.54, and with some
>>>>> version
>>>>> near 8944:d062cc7a8bdf, you get an ipc of 0.093. Which CPU type are you
>>>>> using?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Nilay
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 14 Apr 2012, Mahmood Naderan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The previous release is:
>>>>>> changeset:   8613:712d8bf07020
>>>>>> tag:         tip
>>>>>> user:        Nilay Vaish<[email protected]>
>>>>>> date:        Sat Nov 05 15:32:23 2011 -0500
>>>>>> summary:     Tests: Update stats due to addition of fence microop
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the IPC is 1.541534
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However for the new release, I am not able to find the head:
>>>>>> mahmood@tiger:gem5$ hg head
>>>>>> abort: requirement 'dotencode' not supported!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/14/12, Nilay Vaish <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> How much is the difference and which versions of gem5 are you talking
>>>>>>> about?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Nilay
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Apr 2012, Mahmood Naderan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> In the new version, I see that the IPC of h264 (with sss input) is
>>>>>>>> very very low. However with the previous releases, this value is
>>>>>>>> fine
>>>>>>>> and acceptable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you know how can I find the bottleneck? Which stat value shows
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> weired behaviour?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ISA = x86
>>>>>>>> -F = 50,000,000
>>>>>>>> --maxtick = 10,000,000,000
>>>>>>>> L1 = 32kB, 4
>>>>>>>> L2 = 2MB, 16
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the IPC obtained is 0.093432
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have you faced such result? Please let me know
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> // Naderan *Mahmood;
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> gem5-users mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> gem5-users mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> // Naderan *Mahmood;
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> gem5-users mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> gem5-users mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> // Naderan *Mahmood;
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> gem5-users mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gem5-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> // Naderan *Mahmood;
>> _______________________________________________
>> gem5-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
>


-- 
--
// Naderan *Mahmood;
_______________________________________________
gem5-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users

Reply via email to