Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3535: gpu-compute: Adding context serialization methods to Wavefront

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3535/#review8614 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Andreas Hansson On July 8, 2016, 10:14 p.m.,

[gem5-dev] Review Request 3616: cpu: Support exit when any one Trace CPU completes replay

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3616/ --- Review request for Default. Repository: gem5 Description --- Changeset

[gem5-dev] Review Request 3615: cpu: Adjust for trace offset and fix stats

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3615/ --- Review request for Default. Repository: gem5 Description --- Changeset

[gem5-dev] Review Request 3614: cpu: Add frequency scaling to the Trace CPU

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3614/ --- Review request for Default. Repository: gem5 Description --- Changeset

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3565: arm, config: Fixups for the example big.LITTLE(tm) configuration

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3565/ --- (Updated Aug. 12, 2016, 5:30 p.m.) Review request for Default. Summary (updated)

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3535: gpu-compute: Adding context serialization methods to Wavefront

> On June 30, 2016, 7:17 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/gpu-compute/wavefront.hh, line 389 > > > > > > Surely one of these should be const > > Andreas Hansson wrote: > I do not see this being addressed.

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3603: mem: add DRAM powerdown current

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3603/#review8612 --- Ship it! This patch adds current values to the DRAM configuration which

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3602: mem: Add DRAM low-power functionality

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3602/#review8611 --- I will do a detailed review and testing in the next days. What this

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3580: cpu, mem, sim: Enable KVM support for Ruby

> On Aug. 5, 2016, 7:15 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > I see how this works as a stop gap, but ultimately I would like to push for > > the removal of the shadow memory as the first option. Is it really that > > much effort? > > David Hashe wrote: > I'm not personally familiar enough

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3598: mem: update DDR3 die revision

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3598/#review8609 --- Ship it! This patch uses newer numbers from a recent datasheet. These

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3580: cpu, mem, sim: Enable KVM support for Ruby

> On Aug. 5, 2016, 7:15 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > I see how this works as a stop gap, but ultimately I would like to push for > > the removal of the shadow memory as the first option. Is it really that > > much effort? > > David Hashe wrote: > I'm not personally familiar enough

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3596: mem: make DDR4 x16

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3596/#review8606 --- Technically everything seams right. However, I think the x8

[gem5-dev] changeset in gem5: mem: Update mostly exclusive policy even further

changeset 7e0199f80816 in /z/repo/gem5 details: http://repo.gem5.org/gem5?cmd=changeset;node=7e0199f80816 description: mem: Update mostly exclusive policy even further This patch takes yet another step in maintaining the clusivity, in that it allows a mostly-inclusive

[gem5-dev] changeset in gem5: mem: Add support for secure packets in the sn...

changeset 65ae342b627b in /z/repo/gem5 details: http://repo.gem5.org/gem5?cmd=changeset;node=65ae342b627b description: mem: Add support for secure packets in the snoop filter Secure and non-secure data can coexist in the cache and therefore the snoop filter should treat

[gem5-dev] changeset in gem5: mem: Update mostly exclusive cache policy to ...

changeset 382e0637fae0 in /z/repo/gem5 details: http://repo.gem5.org/gem5?cmd=changeset;node=382e0637fae0 description: mem: Update mostly exclusive cache policy to cover more cases This patch changes how the mostly exclusive policy is enforced to ensure that we drop blocks

[gem5-dev] changeset in gem5: mem: Add a FromCache packet attribute

changeset a38c3f9c82d1 in /z/repo/gem5 details: http://repo.gem5.org/gem5?cmd=changeset;node=a38c3f9c82d1 description: mem: Add a FromCache packet attribute This patch adds a FromCache attribute to the packet, and updates a number of the existing request commands to

Re: [gem5-dev] Installing a Compiled Kernel to Disk Image for ARM

Hi Andreas, Thank you for the reply. I actually need the disk image for different packages from the distribution (like from Ubuntu etc.). So for this I need a rootfs of the distribution on an image, right ? Yasir -Original Message- From: gem5-dev [mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org] On

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3580: cpu, mem, sim: Enable KVM support for Ruby

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3580/#review8605 --- I think this makes sense overall. I can definitely see use cases where I

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3580: cpu, mem, sim: Enable KVM support for Ruby

> On Aug. 12, 2016, 8:44 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/AbstractMemory.py, line 64 > > > > > > I am still trying to wrap my head around what the table looks like with > > in_addr_map, conf_table_Reported, and now

Re: [gem5-dev] Installing a Compiled Kernel to Disk Image for ARM

Hi Yasir, You don’t need to alter your disk images to use a new kernel (in fact, you don’t even need a disk image to start the kernel). The bootstrapping process in gem5 works roughly along these lines: Before time starts (this all happens within gem5): 1. Instantiate all components in

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3580: cpu, mem, sim: Enable KVM support for Ruby

> On Aug. 5, 2016, 7:15 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > I see how this works as a stop gap, but ultimately I would like to push for > > the removal of the shadow memory as the first option. Is it really that > > much effort? > > David Hashe wrote: > I'm not personally familiar enough

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3580: cpu, mem, sim: Enable KVM support for Ruby

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3580/#review8602 --- src/mem/AbstractMemory.py (line 64)

[gem5-dev] Cron <m5test@zizzer> /z/m5/regression/do-regression quick

* build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/20.eio-short/alpha/eio/simple-timing: CHANGED!Statistics mismatch * build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/20.eio-short/alpha/eio/simple-atomic: CHANGED! * build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/30.eio-mp/alpha/eio/simple-atomic-mp: CHANGED!*** stat_diff: FAILURE:

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3580: cpu, mem, sim: Enable KVM support for Ruby

> On Aug. 5, 2016, 7:15 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > I see how this works as a stop gap, but ultimately I would like to push for > > the removal of the shadow memory as the first option. Is it really that > > much effort? > > David Hashe wrote: > I'm not personally familiar enough