I apologize , its my bad. i had use m5.opt.
This is what I got from m5.debug stacktrace:
----------------------------------------------------------------
#0 0x00000000006b377c in ElfObject::tryFile (fna...@0x7fffbe017ab0, fd=7,
len=700259, data=0x2b59fac86000 "\177ELF\002\001\001")
at build/ALPHA_SE/base/loader/elf_object.cc:146
#1 0x00000000006b6824 in createObjectFile (fna...@0x7fffbe017ab0,
raw=false) at build/ALPHA_SE/base/loader/object_file.cc:141
#2 0x000000000070c76e in LiveProcess::create (params=0x49aaea0) at
build/ALPHA_SE/sim/process.cc:655
#3 0x000000000070e0db in LiveProcessParams::create (this=0x49aaea0) at
build/ALPHA_SE/sim/process.cc:768
#4 0x00000000008430d9 in _wrap_LiveProcessParams_create
(args=0x2b58f78ccf10) at build/ALPHA_SE/params/params_wrap.cc:24974
#5 0x0000003ac00360f0 in PyObject_Call () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#6 0x0000003ac009352c in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#7 0x0000003ac0095fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#8 0x0000003ac009473f in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#9 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#10 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#11 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#12 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#13 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#14 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#15 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#16 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#17 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#18 0x0000003ac0095fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#19 0x0000003ac0096032 in PyEval_EvalCode () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#20 0x0000003ac0095237 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#21 0x0000003ac0095fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#22 0x0000003ac009473f in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#23 0x0000003ac0095fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#24 0x0000003ac0096032 in PyEval_EvalCode () from
/usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#25 0x0000003ac00b2729 in ?? () from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
#26 0x00000000006d140e in m5Main (argc=2, argv=0x7fffbe01a6d8) at
build/ALPHA_SE/sim/init.cc:194
#27 0x0000000000408ec7 in main (argc=2, argv=0x7fffbe01a6d8) at
build/ALPHA_SE/sim/main.cc:57
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I am using the static version of the benchmark.
bzip2_base.alpha: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, Alpha (unofficial), version 1
(SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.4.3, statically linked, for GNU/Linux 2.4.3, not
stripped
It seems that the problem is with the benchmarks. But when I have tested the
same set of benchmarks on previous M5 (not the updated one from repository);
it has worked fine for me. So don't understand what exactly happened to the
binaries.
Can you provide me the spec cpu 2006 benchmark binaries.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Korey Sewell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is this a traceback of the debug binary or opt binary? I see a "<value
> optimized out>" in your original stacktrace here which makes me think that
> you might be running m5.opt instead of m5.debug.
>
> You should be rebuilding M5 and get a debug binary first (scons
> build/ALPHA_SE/m5.debug), then running through gdb and using the "bt" or
> "where" command to get the stacktrace.
>
> Once you've got a good stacktrace, you should be able to see the line of
> the error in gdb. You can then go into M5 and then try to figure out why
> that line is causing that error.
>
> If there is in error from elf_object.cc, there is more than likely a
> problem with your SPEC binary. If you run "file <binary>", you can check it
> out to see if your binary is dynamically or statically linked. If it's
> dynamically linked, then that's the problem since SE mode binaries need to
> be static.
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:55 AM, Ashutosh Jain <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I am getting the stack traceback as:
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------
>> (gdb) where
>> #0 ElfObject::tryFile (fna...@0x7fff537dcc40, fd=7, len=157111,
>> data=0x2b9dc366d000 "\177ELF\002\001\001")
>> at build/ALPHA_SE/base/loader/elf_object.cc:146
>> #1 0x00000000006fcedb in createObjectFile (fna...@0x7fff537dcc40,
>> raw=false) at build/ALPHA_SE/base/loader/object_file.cc:141
>> #2 0x00000000007558b5 in LiveProcess::create (params=0x99cde10)
>> at build/ALPHA_SE/sim/process.cc:655
>> #3 0x000000000087a3ab in _wrap_LiveProcessParams_create (
>> args=<value optimized out>)
>> at build/ALPHA_SE/params/params_wrap.cc:24974
>> #4 0x0000003ac00360f0 in PyObject_Call ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #5 0x0000003ac009352c in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #6 0x0000003ac0095fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #7 0x0000003ac009473f in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #8 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #9 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #10 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #11 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #12 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #13 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #14 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #15 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #16 0x0000003ac0094b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #17 0x0000003ac0095fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #18 0x0000003ac0096032 in PyEval_EvalCode ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #19 0x0000003ac0095237 in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #20 0x0000003ac0095fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> ---Type <return> to continue, or q <return> to quit---
>> #21 0x0000003ac009473f in PyEval_EvalFrame ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #22 0x0000003ac0095fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #23 0x0000003ac0096032 in PyEval_EvalCode ()
>> from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #24 0x0000003ac00b2729 in ?? () from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #25 0x000000000071e178 in m5Main (argc=<value optimized out>,
>> argv=<value optimized out>) at build/ALPHA_SE/sim/init.cc:194
>> #26 0x00000000004089f2 in main (argc=2, argv=0x7fff537df798)
>> at build/ALPHA_SE/sim/main.cc:57
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Steve Reinhardt <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Just run m5.debug under gdb, and when you hit the segfault, type
>>> 'where' at the gdb prompt.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Ashutosh Jain <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi
>>> > How can I do stack backtrace in M5?
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:32 PM, Steve Reinhardt <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> OK; can you provide a stack backtrace for the segfault?
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Ashutosh Jain <[email protected]>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > Hi
>>> >> > Yes I have compiled the benchmarks and got the binaries..
>>> >> > Ashutosh
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Steve Reinhardt <[email protected]>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> We'd need a stack backtrace from the segfault to begin to guess
>>> what's
>>> >> >> going on...
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Where did you get the binaries from? Did you compile them
>>> yourself?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Steve
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Ashutosh Jain <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >> > Hi
>>> >> >> > I am working on the updated M5 from the repository. I would like
>>> to
>>> >> >> > run
>>> >> >> > simulations with SPEC CPU 2006 benchmarks; but every
>>> >> >> > time the simulation
>>> >> >> > ends with segmentation fault. Is this the problem with M5 or SPEC
>>> CPU
>>> >> >> > 2006
>>> >> >> > or am I missing something.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Consider the case of benchmark bzip2. I have set it like:
>>> >> >> > -------------------
>>> >> >> > specbzip2 = os.path.join(test_base,
>>> >> >> > '/home/ashutoshj/newm5/configs/cpu2006/speccpu2006/bzip2/')
>>> >> >> > specbzip2out = os.path.join(test_base,
>>> >> >> > '/home/ashutoshj/newm5/configs/cpu2006/speccpu2006/bzip2/')
>>> >> >> > class SPECBZIP2(LiveProcess):
>>> >> >> > executable = os.path.join(specbzip2, 'bzip2_peak.alpha')
>>> >> >> > cmd = 'bzip2_peak.alpha input.source 280
>>> >> >> > output = os.path.join(specbzip2out, 'input.source.out')
>>> >> >> > ---------------------------------
>>> >> >> > And used in the se.py file. Then I ran the simulation it gives
>>> the
>>> >> >> > output
>>> >> >> > as:
>>> >> >> > ----------------------------------------------
>>> >> >> > M5 Simulator System
>>> >> >> > Copyright (c) 2001-2008
>>> >> >> > The Regents of The University of Michigan
>>> >> >> > All Rights Reserved
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > M5 compiled Mar 10 2010 06:42:32
>>> >> >> > M5 revision 79463f723460+ 6018+ default tip
>>> >> >> > M5 started Mar 21 2010 19:31:14
>>> >> >> > M5 executing on leif.cs.lamar.edu
>>> >> >> > command line: ../../build/ALPHA_SE/m5.opt -d
>>> cmp01_thds01_L2cache01
>>> >> >> > cmp01_thds01_L2cache01.py --detailed --caches
>>> >> >> > max_insts_all_threads = 100000
>>> >> >> > SPECBZIP2()
>>> >> >> > system.cpu[0].workload = Benchmarks.SPECBZIP2()
>>> >> >> > Global frequency set at 1000000000000 ticks per second
>>> >> >> > Segmentation fault
>>> >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >> > Also all the SPEC CPU 2006 benchmarks with their inputs, outputs,
>>> and
>>> >> >> > executables in their respective directories are present at :
>>> >> >> > /home/ashutoshj/newm5/configs/cpu2006/speccpu2006/
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > With exactly the same configurations, SPEC CPU2000 gave me the
>>> >> >> > desired
>>> >> >> > expected results; So I am unable to find a solution to this
>>> problem.
>>> >> >> > Hoping to hear a solution
>>> >> >> > --
>>> >> >> > Ashutosh Jain
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> > 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
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Ashutosh Jain
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> > 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
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Ashutosh Jain
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ashutosh Jain
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> m5-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>>
>
>
>
> --
> - Korey
>
> _______________________________________________
> m5-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>
--
Ashutosh Jain
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
