Hi,
That can happen.. But why is the behavior you describe not acceptable? if
another structure is added, then incoming snoops have to CAM into that
structure too and hardware implementation wise, may be not efficient.
Thanks
Srini
On 05/05/14, Adrián Colaso Diego via gem5-users wrote:
) or by restricting the resource usage (wait-hold
relationship), in this case the MSHRs by ³reserving² enough space in
advance. Could you elaborate on why this would not be addressing the
fundamental problem?
Thanks,
Andreas
On 23/04/2014 01:45, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy narayanam...@wisc.edu
wrote
Hi,
I am using gem5 ARM with classic memory config and l2 tride prefetcher. There
are 4 cores in the system and a shared l2. I think I may have hit a coherence
protocol deadlock. Here's whats happening.
Cycle 0: Core 2: Schedules an UpgradeReq to be sent out at Cycle 2.
Between Cycle 0 and
number of mshrs in the system. I think that will solve your issue and it
sounds like a reasonable approach.
Ali
On 22.04.2014 12:15, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy wrote:
Hi, I am using gem5 ARM with classic memory config and l2 tride prefetcher.
There are 4 cores in the system
Hi all,
I am trying to run some android benchmarks in gem5 and often, the cpu is put to
sleep by executing a 'WFI'(Wait for interrupt) instruction. The task requires
me to take checkpoints frequently during program execution.
I found that when performing drain before writing the checkpoint,
and never comes out. It keeps
spinning in the loop with no progress.
Any help for debugging further will be great!
Thanks
-Pushkar
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy
narayanam...@wisc.edu(javascript:main.compose() wrote:
Hi
1) For the first
Hi
1) For the first problem, I suspect that the threadcontext is suspended and for
some reason it never wakes up. You can look for any quiesce() instructions that
is not accompanied by a respective wakeup().
2) The basic problem here is that a drain is signalled when a pipelined op
whose
that is to be
DVFS-ed (obviously requiring wakeup).
HTH,
Stephan
On 23.03.2014 14:26, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy narayanam...@wisc.edu
wrote:
Hi all,
I have implemented a per-core DVFS in gem5, mimicking an on-demand
governer. My question here is if the cpu is in quiesce state(TC
Hi all,
I have implemented a per-core DVFS in gem5, mimicking an on-demand governer. My
question here is if the cpu is in quiesce state(TC is suspended) while DVFS
routine is scheduled, should I wakeup() the suspended TC?.
Similarly while doing a drain and switching to a different cpu model,
, it would be good to fix this issue.
Judging by your first e-mail it sounds like you more or less coded up a
fix already, so I¹d say go ahead and post it on the review board.
Andreas
On 11/03/2014 02:34, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy narayanam...@wisc.edu
wrote:
Hi Andreas,Thanks
Hi,
I am trying to switch between two detailed ARM cpu models using repeat-switch
for bbench. I am hitting the assert(!memReq) assertion in drainSanityCheck()
after around around 3 seconds (300 switches) of simulation time. I looked at
the code but could not think of a situation where drain
...I am not sure
how to handle recvRetry() though in this case..
I am pretty sure that i might be missing something in either of the two
solutions. I would be very thankful if a solution can be suggested.
Thanks
Srini
On 03/10/14, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy wrote:
Hi,
I am trying
that would
fix the problem. In essence the bus would then _not_ be considered drained
until the packet gets to retry and succeeds.
It might be worth trying. How easy is it for you to reproduce the problem?
Andreas
On 3/10/14, 10:14 PM, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy narayanam...@wisc.edu
wrote
21:41 GMT+01:00 Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy
narayanam...@wisc.edu(javascript:main.compose():
Hi,
I observed the following in the drain code.
if (drained !fuPool-isDrained()) {
DPRINTF(Drain, FU pool still busy.\n);
drained = false;
}
Consider
Hi,
I observed the following in the drain code.
if (drained !fuPool-isDrained()) {
DPRINTF(Drain, FU pool still busy.\n);
drained = false;
}
Consider a pipelined computation with op_latency cycles(1).
By default, the functional units are freed in the next cycle and hence Drain
page.
Also, try running your switching test with the default detailed configuratin
as well as your configuration. There might be hidden assumptions in the O3
model that break when you change the configuration.
//Andreas
On 2014-02-04 01:51, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy wrote:
Hi Andreas
Hi,This is Srini. I have implemented a system level DFS in gem5 and it seems to
be working. Now I am trying to implement per-core DFS in gem5. With the current
class hierarchy, clockedObject is the parent of the cpu classes and there is
just one _clockPeriod member. Thus all cpu's update the
Hi,I am Srini. I am kind of a new user to gem5 and for some of my experiments,
I need to repeatedly switch between two cpu models. I figured configuring
repeat-switch option is an easy way of doing it but was soon hitting some drain
related assertions. Turns out that when the drain manager is
from last Sunday or newer, otherwise rflags synchronization on
x86 won't work because of a regression introduced a couple of months ago.
//Andreas
On 2014-02-03 22:13, Srinivasan Narayanamoorthy wrote:
Hi,I am Srini. I am kind of a new user to gem5 and for some of my
experiments, I need
19 matches
Mail list logo
