Hi

The assert says :
m5.opt: build/ALPHA_FS/cpu/simple/atomic.cc:496: Fault
AtomicSimpleCPU::read(Addr, T&, unsigned int) [with T = uint64_t]: Assertion
`!pkt.isError()' failed.

And we have printf statements in the addlv instruction, so that whenever it
executes, we get to know. Those statements are not being printed, so I think
its not the addlv which is getting executed.

Thanks
Pritha


On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Gabriel Michael Black <[email protected]
> wrote:

> What does the actual assert say? I'm wildly guessing a load crossed a cache
> line boundary, but it's hard to say from the backtrace. That addlv
> instruction might actually be executed. You could try implementing a pseudo
> instruction which is much less likely to be used accidentally.
>
> Gabe
>
>
> Quoting Pritha Ghoshal <[email protected]>:
>
>  Hi,
>>
>> We have been getting an abort while running M5 in full system mode. We
>> have
>> modified one instruction (addlv) to execute a different function, because
>> that instruction is never used in the kernel part of the code.  The
>> debugger
>> backtrace output is given below. Could anyone help us by  suggesting
>> possible reasons for this abort?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Pritha
>>
>>
>> #0  0x0000003423c30265 in raise () from /lib64/libc.so.6
>> #1  0x0000003423c31d10 in abort () from /lib64/libc.so.6
>> #2  0x0000003423c296e6 in __assert_fail () from /lib64/libc.so.6
>> #3  0x0000000000435a3e in read<uint64_t> (this=0x14e4950,
>> addr=1099510579592, da...@0x7fffffffd0e8, flags=512) at
>> build/ALPHA_FS/cpu/simple/atomic.cc:518
>> #4  0x0000000000456465 in AlphaISAInst::Hw_ldQ::execute (this=0x2051e70,
>> xc=0x14e4950, traceData=0x0) at build/ALPHA_FS/base/flags.hh:45
>> #5  0x0000000000425be6 in AtomicSimpleCPU::tick (this=0x14e4950) at
>> build/ALPHA_FS/base/refcnt.hh:83
>> #6  0x00000000006703d5 in EventQueue::serviceOne (this=<value optimized
>> out>) at build/ALPHA_FS/sim/eventq.cc:202
>> #7  0x00000000009f2f12 in simulate (num_cycles=9223372036854775807) at
>> build/ALPHA_FS/sim/simulate.cc:73
>> #8  0x0000000000a62fd7 in _wrap_simulate (self=<value optimized out>,
>> args=<value optimized out>) at
>> build/ALPHA_FS/python/swig/event_wrap.cc:4079
>> #9  0x000000343b2360f0 in PyObject_Call () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #10 0x000000343b29352c in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #11 0x000000343b295fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #12 0x000000343b29473f in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #13 0x000000343b294b66 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #14 0x000000343b295fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #15 0x000000343b296032 in PyEval_EvalCode () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #16 0x000000343b295237 in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #17 0x000000343b295fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #18 0x000000343b29473f in PyEval_EvalFrame () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #19 0x000000343b295fe5 in PyEval_EvalCodeEx () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #20 0x000000343b296032 in PyEval_EvalCode () from
>> /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #21 0x000000343b2b2729 in ?? () from /usr/lib64/libpython2.4.so.1.0
>> #22 0x0000000000791365 in m5Main (argc=<value optimized out>, argv=<value
>> optimized out>) at build/ALPHA_FS/sim/init.cc:194
>> #23 0x000000000040854c in main (argc=7, argv=0x7fffffffe848) at
>> build/ALPHA_FS/sim/main.cc:57
>>
>>
>> --
>> Pritha Ghoshal
>> Texas A&M University
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> m5-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>



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

Reply via email to