Is that the new version? Doesn't look like it. Note that you could always build the string and then use split() in python to turn it into a list at the last step.
Steve On Nov 15, 2007 9:13 AM, Ali Saidi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 15, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Sujay Phadke wrote: > > > Yes, it works with this array notation. Though why was it changed > > from b3? I think its easier to give the arguments as a long string, > > because each benchmark is using different rules to pick out the argv > > values. > > Some use any parameter passed without a "-" as the filename (cholesky) > > > > In the string notation, the filename was passed like: > > options.workdir + options.rootdir + '/kernels/cholesky/inputs/tk23.O > > > > How do I write this in the array format? The concatenation doesnt > > work. > > > > - Sujay > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Reinhardt" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "M5 users mailing list" <m5-users@m5sim.org> > > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 4:38 AM > > Subject: Re: [m5-users] sims with m5 beta4 - cache stats - any > > update on this? > > > > > >> Good catch, thanks... but then how did it work correctly in b3? Did > >> that change recently? > >> > >> On Nov 15, 2007 12:42 AM, Ali Saidi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> The args are fine, you're just passing the arguments to m5 > >>> incorrectly. The command should be an array of strings (like argv) > >>> not > >>> one big string. So changing the cmd line to: cmd = ['FFT', '-p', > >>> str(options.numcpus), ' -m18'] should fix the problem. > >>> > >>> Ali > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> > >>> On Nov 15, 2007, at 2:25 AM, Gabe Black wrote: > >>> > >>> > I don't remember changing anything having to do with Alpha > >>> process > >>> > initialization other than the changes I made to paging, aka TLBs > >>> in SE > >>> > mode and everything that went with it. I don't want to say for > >>> sure > >>> > that > >>> > I didn't since it was a fairly long time between b3 and b4, but I > >>> > would > >>> > be surprised if I did. > >>> > > >>> > Gabe > >>> > > >>> > Steve Reinhardt wrote: > >>> >> Interesting... from what you're reporting, it sounds like the > >>> problem > >>> >> is likely in the code that sets up the stack (argv, argc, and all > >>> >> that > >>> >> good stuff). That's in LiveProcess::argsInit() in sim/ > >>> process.cc. I > >>> >> don't know what if anything has changed in there from b3 to b4 > >>> >> though... I don't recall touching it, but Gabe might have. > >>> >> > >>> >> The next step would be to put a breakpoint in that function and > >>> see > >>> >> if > >>> >> the argv array really does have the right number of entries, > >>> and that > >>> >> the entries point to the arg strings. > >>> >> > >>> >> Steve > >>> >> > >>> >> On Nov 14, 2007 10:36 PM, Sujay Phadke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >>> A typo. In beta, the number of complex doubles reported is: > >>> >>> 262144 Complex > >>> >>> Doubles, which is correct since it should be 2^18. (the -m18 > >>> >>> switch passes > >>> >>> this value). > >>> >>> > >>> >>> So it there some problem passing these values to the benchmarks > >>> >>> (atleast in > >>> >>> SE mode in beta4?) HAs something is parameter passing changed > >>> >>> between beta 3 > >>> >>> and beta 4? > >>> >>> > >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>> From: "Sujay Phadke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>> To: "M5 users mailing list" <m5-users@m5sim.org> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 1:29 AM > >>> >>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] sims with m5 beta4 - cache stats - any > >>> >>> update on > >>> >>> this? > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>>> ok I looked at the output and I think what is happening only 1 > >>> >>>> processor > >>> >>>> ie being assigned to the benchmark, ragardless of what value i > >>> >>>> put. But I > >>> >>>> dont know why this is happening. I type: > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> ./build/ALPHA_SE/m5.opt configs/splash2/runsplash.py -n 4 -k > >>> 4 -b > >>> >>>> FFT > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> and still at the end of simulation using beta 4, it reports > >>> this: > >>> >>>> 1024 Complex Doubles > >>> >>>> 1 Processors > >>> >>>> 65536 Cache lines > >>> >>>> 16 Byte line size > >>> >>>> 4096 Bytes per page > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> if I use beta3, this is what is reported: > >>> >>>> 1024 Complex Doubles > >>> >>>> 4 Processors > >>> >>>> 65536 Cache lines > >>> >>>> 16 Byte line size > >>> >>>> 4096 Bytes per page > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> the line in the config script that invokes fft is: > >>> >>>> class FFT(LiveProcess): > >>> >>>> cwd = options.rootdir + '/kernels/fft' > >>> >>>> executable = options.rootdir + '/kernels/fft/FFT' > >>> >>>> cmd = 'FFT -p' + str(options.numcpus) + ' -m18' > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> If I do a print options.numcpus here, it correctly prints out > >>> >>>> "4". So n=4 > >>> >>>> is definitely being passed onto fft. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> I dont know why in beta 4, the correct numcpus is not being > >>> used > >>> >>>> by fft, > >>> >>>> or some other benchmarks. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Any ideas? > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Thanks for your help. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> - Sujay > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>>> From: "Steve Reinhardt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>> To: "M5 users mailing list" <m5-users@m5sim.org> > >>> >>>> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:03 AM > >>> >>>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] sims with m5 beta4 - cache stats - any > >>> >>>> update on > >>> >>>> this? > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>>> I don't recall what the output files are called... each > >>> >>>>> benchmark is a > >>> >>>>> little different in splash. You're looking for the benchmark > >>> >>>>> output > >>> >>>>> in addition to the m5 output... I'm guessing something bad > >>> >>>>> happened > >>> >>>>> and the benchmark quit because it encountered an error. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> On Nov 14, 2007 4:26 PM, Sujay Phadke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> wrote: > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>>> Ok. Though I dont know what to look for, since there's > >>> nothing > >>> >>>>>> that I > >>> >>>>>> have > >>> >>>>>> changed since beta3. Which output files should I examine? > >>> >>>>>> The benchmarks ends because m5 reports "target called > >>> exit()". > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> - Sujay > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>>>>> From: "Steve Reinhardt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>>> To: "M5 users mailing list" <m5-users@m5sim.org> > >>> >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 6:31 PM > >>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] sims with m5 beta4 - cache stats - > >>> any > >>> >>>>>> update on > >>> >>>>>> this? > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>>> Thanks, this is very interesting. Have you looked at the > >>> >>>>>>> output from > >>> >>>>>>> the benchmarks that are producing weird results? I'd say > >>> from > >>> >>>>>>> those > >>> >>>>>>> stats (and your comment that those benchmarks are finishing > >>> >>>>>>> "extremely > >>> >>>>>>> fast") that the real problem is that the benchmark is > >>> >>>>>>> terminating > >>> >>>>>>> early, before it even gets to forking off threads on the > >>> other > >>> >>>>>>> CPUs, > >>> >>>>>>> due to some error. Presumably the output is indicating > >>> what the > >>> >>>>>>> problem is if you look in the right place. > >>> >>>>>>> > >>> >>>>>>> So there's still some problem with b4 if you weren't > >>> >>>>>>> encountering that > >>> >>>>>>> error in b3, but it's not that the cache statistics are > >>> broken. > >>> >>>>>>> > >>> >>>>>>> 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 > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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
