oh ok. Ya I am using b3, since I am getting errors running b4. Then I think
the numbers should me converted correctly into simticks. In b3, the default
value for cas_lat=1. So if this is in ticks, it would be 1E-12, which is not
correct. So multiplying by 1000 should work.
If I use b4 and value is in latency (ns).
Does the scaling sound correct?
- Sujay
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ali Saidi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "M5 users mailing list" <m5-users@m5sim.org>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: [m5-users]
2.0b4PhysicalMemory::doAtomicAccess()forExclusiveReads Problem
The numbers used to calculate the latency and the actual simulator
parameters have no linkage. If you change the parameters for the
simulation you need to manually change the parameters for the DRAM. I
don't believe those numbers could be correct,but they all depend on the
parameters you've given to the DRAM SimObject. Are you using b4? If not
the parameters are in terms of ticks. If you are they they're in terms of
an explicit latency.
Ali
On Nov 12, 2007, at 3:22 PM, Sujay Phadke wrote:
By default, I have a bus frequency of 1ns and a cpu_ratio of 5. So that
means that memory operates at 200MHz. Is this right? If so, can the
access latencies be as small as 20-60 ps?
- Sujay
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ali Saidi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "M5 users mailing list" <m5-users@m5sim.org>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: [m5-users] 2.0b4
PhysicalMemory::doAtomicAccess()forExclusiveReads Problem
It's in picoseconds. In b4 the parameters were changed to be Latency
numbers instead of ints forcing the parameter to be specified in units
of time (e.g. "1ns")
Ali
On Nov 12, 2007, at 2:37 PM, Sujay Phadke wrote:
Thanks. How does the latency calculated in dram.cc translate to
actual latency? Is the latency calculated (which is of type int) in
terms of system clock cycles, or cpu clock cycles, or something else?
Currently, I get lat values between 25 to 60, most of the times.
- Sujay
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Reinhardt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To: "M5 users mailing list" <m5-users@m5sim.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: [m5-users] 2.0b4 PhysicalMemory::doAtomicAccess()
forExclusiveReads Problem
I did; it's earlier in this thread (a posting from me just about a
day ago).
Steve
On 11/11/07, Sujay Phadke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How did you do the random latency hack? Could you post the code?
Thanks,
Sujay
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Reinhardt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "M5 users mailing list" <m5-users@m5sim.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [m5-users] 2.0b4 PhysicalMemory::doAtomicAccess() for
ExclusiveReads Problem
> Thanks... I grabbed your binary and now I get the same assertion
> failure even with my simple random latency hack. So it is
something
> weird in our code for sure. The really strange thing is that it
> initially hit the assertion after something like 8.6B ticks, but
when
> I turned tracing on it hit it after only 9M ticks. For
tracing to
> affect the simulation like that I'm guessing it's some kind of
bad
> pointer or memory allocation bug. I'm running under valgrind
now but
> haven't turned up anything yet.
>
> I'll keep you posted...
>
>>The method of calculating
>> latencies based upon some known state at the time the packet
arrives
>> won't work for me, because the latency is not only variable but
is >> also
>> nondeterministic at that point. A later request could have
higher
>> priority than earlier ones and thus dynamically increase the
latency >> of
>> the earlier requests.
>
> Yea, that makes sense.
>
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> m5-users mailing list
> m5-users@m5sim.org
> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
m5-users@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
m5-users@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
m5-users@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
m5-users@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
m5-users@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
m5-users@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
m5-users@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
