Yes now it is working if I do not use DRAMsim, when I use DRAMsim it does not
work. I think this is related with what Nate say that it is not common to
checkpoint time related things.
The reason to use fastforwarding is to speed up the simulation. Do you have a
copy and paste example of fastforwarding in FS that I can take as an example?.
I want to fastfoward for exmple 200e6 instructions switch to detailed do my
stuff for 100e6 and after fastfoward again until the end of the simulation.
Also I saw in a post that Nate said that it is possible to take stats when the
simulation reach a certain cycle number, I could not find any documentation to
do this, can anyone post an explanation of how this can be done?.
Thanks a lot in advance.
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:45:35 -0500
> Subject: Re: [m5-users] [PATCH] Beta patch for M5 2.0 DRAMsim implemention
>
>
> On Feb 19, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Angela Carlsson wrote:
>
> > Hello Ali thanks for the answer, you were right was an M5 bug, I was
> > using a little bit old version of M5 I updated and the error was
> > gone. I was testing DRAMsim and checkpoints and they do not work.
> So, it is working in the new version?
>
> >
> >
> > By the way does fastforwarding work in FS?.
> Yes. Are you planning on using it instead of simulation?
>
> Ali
>
>
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the answers.
> >
> > > From: [email protected]
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:42:35 -0500
> > > Subject: Re: [m5-users] [PATCH] Beta patch for M5 2.0 DRAMsim
> > implemention
> > >
> > >
> > > On Feb 18, 2009, at 9:01 PM, nathan binkert wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Hmm...it is derived from PhysicalMemory, so from that viewpoint
> > all
> > > >> it
> > > >> needs is to be rebuilt using the same parameters and have the
> > > >> underlying PhysicalMemory data restored correctly. If
> > PhysicalMemory
> > > >> currently works with checkpointing, I am unclear what in my
> > DRAMsim
> > > >> code prevents it from working, since I do not override either
> > > >> serialize or unserialize. Any ideas on what to look for?
> > > >
> > > > Well, the error isn't with serialize/unserialize actually, it's
> > with
> > > > the drain code that forces the memory system to drain all in
> > flight
> > > > requests. We do the drain before we take a checkpoint to make
> > sure we
> > > > don't lose any data.
> > > It's possible that it's not a bug with DRAMsim, but rather some
> > other
> > > issue with M5. What other components are you simulating? Do you
> > have a
> > > NIC in the simulation? I know that over the last few months I've
> > fixed
> > > one or two checkpointing bugs with the Intel NIC model. A good start
> > > to understanding the problem is printing out the value of getCount()
> > > before that assert occurs. A value less than 0 means that some
> > object
> > > called process() on it's drainEvent more than it should have. I
> > don't
> > > think a positive value is possible.
> > >
> > > Ali
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > m5-users mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
> >
> > ¡Haz tu clic solidario y ayuda a África! ¡Puedes empezar ahora!
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
_________________________________________________________________
Llega la nueva temporada. Consulta las nuevas tendencias en MSN Estilo
http://estilo.es.msn.com/moda/
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
