Hello Andreas,

We are considering to use ArmKvmCPU. I have a couple of questions regarding
its simulation methodology. From my understanding so far, KVM is a good way
to speedup simulations by switching between virtual (faster) and simulated
CPU. So, I am wondering if we can rely on all Gem5 stats that will be
reported after the simulation? Will running an arm_detailed CPU and
ArmKvmCPU result in similar stats? Also, does KVM CPU use dram controller
from Gem5 to simulate memory or it uses host physical memory?

Thanks,
-Rizwana

On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Davesh Shingari <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Thanks a lot for clarification.
> I didn't know about that.
> ᐧ
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Guru Prasad <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Gem5 has a command line argument --dual. This starts up 2 separate
>> simulations (inside 1 process) where one is called the driver and the other
>> is the 'real' test system.
>> Since networking requires at least two systems, you usually use --dual
>> when you want to test the network. Because gem5 is not yet multi-threaded
>> (I think), both simulations end up using only 1 core.
>> Hence, ideally this should result in a 2x slowdown. However, I'm seeing a
>> lot more. That's what my question was about.
>>
>> My single system simulations also take about 12-15 hours to complete.
>> With detailed they take a lot longer (haven't fully completed a sim yet).
>>
>> Regards
>> Guru
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Davesh Shingari <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Just to be sure,what do you mean by dual?
>>> Do you mean 2 simulation or multiple core configuration?
>>> ᐧ
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Guru Prasad <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Davesh, just to clarify, is this with --dual?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Guru
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Davesh Shingari <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Guru
>>>>>
>>>>> I am using Android on Gem5 for my work. When I use the simulation to
>>>>> take checkpoint, then it takes around 12 - 15 hours to get checkpoint and
>>>>> finish simulation. The simulation time is 32 seconds after the checkpoint.
>>>>> But when I use that checkpoint along with detailed mode configuration and
>>>>> full memory system, then it takes almost a week to complete.
>>>>> ᐧ
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Guru Prasad <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah I see. It sounds like the sort of like the hack we made for hdlcd
>>>>>> where we read from physical memory directly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks once again. I will try the options you've described.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Guru
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Andreas Hansson
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> > Hi Guru,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 3 days for 20 seconds sounds way slower than it should be.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Fast-mem is not replacing the DRAM controller, it bypasses the
>>>>>> entire
>>>>>> > memory system. In atomic we do not do any sensible timing
>>>>>> simulation of
>>>>>> > the controller in any case.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > The KVM CPU is only built if your system support it. Hence, you
>>>>>> need to
>>>>>> > build gem5 for ARM on an ARM system. A good reason to get an ARM
>>>>>> server :-)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Andreas
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On 03/08/2015 16:46, "gem5-users on behalf of Guru Prasad"
>>>>>> > <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >>Hi Andreas,
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>Thanks for the suggestions. It took about 3 days to simulate
>>>>>> 20seconds
>>>>>> >>under atomic.
>>>>>> >>I don't know how to tell if interrupts are being lost. The kernel is
>>>>>> >>not complaining about anything on kmsg.
>>>>>> >>I will try atomic with --fast-mem. Currently, I've been using
>>>>>> >>lpddr3_1600_x32
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>I don't think I have KvmArmCPU available. I will try the same with
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> >>latest.
>>>>>> >>Is using KvmArmCPU as simple as just saying --cpu-type=...?
>>>>>> >>I ask this because --list-cpu-types for my current version only
>>>>>> displays
>>>>>> >>    timing => TimingSimpleCPU
>>>>>> >>    detailed => DerivO3CPU
>>>>>> >>    atomic => AtomicSimpleCPU
>>>>>> >>    minor => MinorCPU
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>Regards
>>>>>> >>Guru
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Andreas Hansson
>>>>>> >><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> >>> Hi Guru,
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> To speed things up, here are some options:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> 1. Use atomic to get the point of interest, then take a
>>>>>> checkpoint. Is
>>>>>> >>> this what you are doing?
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> 2. For the above, run with --fast-mem since you’re not warming any
>>>>>> >>>caches
>>>>>> >>> anyways.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> 3. If possible, use the KvmArmCPU instead of (1). This should
>>>>>> give you a
>>>>>> >>> significant boost.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> If the amount of work is constant, than running with dual should
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> >>>slow
>>>>>> >>> things down. If you’re seeing a slow down, then perhaps something
>>>>>> odd is
>>>>>> >>> going on in the simulation (interrupts getting lost etc). Have
>>>>>> you tried
>>>>>> >>> with the latest trunk?
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Andreas
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> On 03/08/2015 16:16, "gem5-users on behalf of Guru Prasad"
>>>>>> >>> <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>>Hi,
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>Recently we've been trying to run some experiments with the
>>>>>> network.
>>>>>> >>>>To do so, we've been using dual simulations. So far, we've been
>>>>>> able
>>>>>> >>>>to get away with running two simulations booting barebones linux
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> >>>>just a shell. However, our real workload is BBench and so we need
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >>>>boot a full Android image.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>A single simulation of full Android takes us about ~12hours to
>>>>>> boot.
>>>>>> >>>>However under dual, its been about 3 days and has so far simulated
>>>>>> >>>>only ~20seconds. Is there any way to speed up the simulation? Is
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> >>>>any way we can stitch two single simulations together (initial
>>>>>> loss of
>>>>>> >>>>time on drivesys is acceptable).
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>Currently we're on revision e179497451.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>Regards
>>>>>> >>>>Guru
>>>>>> >>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>> >>>>gem5-users mailing list
>>>>>> >>>>[email protected]
>>>>>> >>>>http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any
>>>>>> attachments are
>>>>>> >>>confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the
>>>>>> intended
>>>>>> >>>recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not
>>>>>> disclose the
>>>>>> >>>contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or
>>>>>> copy
>>>>>> >>>the information in any medium.  Thank you.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1
>>>>>> 9NJ,
>>>>>> >>>Registered in England & Wales, Company No:  2557590
>>>>>> >>> ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge
>>>>>> CB1
>>>>>> >>>9NJ, Registered in England & Wales, Company No:  2548782
>>>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> >>> 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
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments
>>>>>> are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
>>>>>> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
>>>>>> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> information in any medium.  Thank you.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1
>>>>>> 9NJ, Registered in England & Wales, Company No:  2557590
>>>>>> > ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge
>>>>>> CB1 9NJ, Registered in England & Wales, Company No:  2548782
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Have a great day!
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks and Warm Regards
>>>>> Davesh Shingari
>>>>> Master's in Computer Engineering [EE]
>>>>> Arizona State University
>>>>>
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Have a great day!
>>>
>>> Thanks and Warm Regards
>>> Davesh Shingari
>>> Master's in Computer Engineering [EE]
>>> Arizona State University
>>>
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Have a great day!
>
> Thanks and Warm Regards
> Davesh Shingari
> Master's in Computer Engineering [EE]
> Arizona State University
>
> [email protected]
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to