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
