[m5-dev] changeset in m5: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006).

2008-11-17 Thread Steve Reinhardt
changeset c5447915af50 in /z/repo/m5 details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=c5447915af50 description: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006). diffstat: 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) tests/long/70.twolf/ref/sparc/linux/simple-timing/m5stats.txt |

Re: [m5-dev] changeset in m5: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006).

2008-11-17 Thread nathan binkert
Ah, so that was you. That makes sense. I seriously wonder if this or something like it is the problem with 20.parser. Nate On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Steve Reinhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: changeset c5447915af50 in /z/repo/m5 details:

Re: [m5-dev] changeset in m5: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006).

2008-11-17 Thread Steve Reinhardt
I sort of doubt it... parser has always been a bit nondeterministic, where this is just a subtle and unforeseen but deterministic side effect of a bug fix. Steve On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:57 AM, nathan binkert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ah, so that was you. That makes sense. I seriously wonder

Re: [m5-dev] changeset in m5: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006).

2008-11-17 Thread nathan binkert
I more meant that it seems like an infrequently used syscall that uses an uninitilaized variable that affects the return value could easily be the result. The stats differences in both simulations are minimal and similar. Nate On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Steve Reinhardt [EMAIL

Re: [m5-dev] changeset in m5: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006).

2008-11-17 Thread nathan binkert
The biggest problem is that I've never been able to find two machines that behave differently. When things change, I can't find something that did it the old way. Nate If somebody can and wants to get a tracediff between two differently behaving versions of parser, that would go a long way

Re: [m5-dev] changeset in m5: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006).

2008-11-17 Thread gblack
Exactly. Or one machine will be in Ann Arbor and the other in California. Maybe it has something to do with the test checking the actual clock time/date on the host somehow? It could behave slightly differently depending on some little part of that like converting it to seconds changing the path

Re: [m5-dev] changeset in m5: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006).

2008-11-17 Thread Steve Reinhardt
Interestingly, I just ran on my desktop here and on zizzer and both failed, but when I looked more closely, I see that my desktop is failing because it's running 5 fewer instructions than the reference output, while zizzer is failing because it's running 5 extra instructions. (And yes, I

Re: [m5-dev] changeset in m5: Update stats for brk fix (cset f28f020f3006).

2008-11-17 Thread gblack
Yes, I'm sure it's not a timing mode thing. The timing mode regressions didn't exist for x86 until very recently, and parser has been unstable for maybe as long as a year. Gabe Quoting Steve Reinhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Interestingly, I just ran on my desktop here and on zizzer and both