Re: [gem5-users] system.cpu.numCycles: (gem5-stable-0e86fac7254c) vs (gem5-most-recent)

Thanks Ciro. I will follow your recommendations. Best regards, Abbas Fairouz - Abbas Fairouz, PhD candidate Dept. of ECE, Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843, USA - On Wed, Sep 12, 2018

Re: [gem5-users] system.cpu.numCycles: (gem5-stable-0e86fac7254c) vs (gem5-most-recent)

Hey Abbas, Please always reply to the gem5 mailing list, and CC me when appropriate, I can understand why you would like to have a fixed number. I think the stats can vary due to a very wide number of complex factors. Some of those may be more accurate, others no one knows, others just bugs. Thi

Re: [gem5-users] system.cpu.numCycles: (gem5-stable-0e86fac7254c) vs (gem5-most-recent)

Thanks for the detailed report, I recommend that if you really care about this difference, then do a bisection of gem5 and pinpoint which commit introduced it, and then tell us which one it was, possibly also pinging the author for clarification. If you are not familiar with bisection, here is a

[gem5-users] system.cpu.numCycles: (gem5-stable-0e86fac7254c) vs (gem5-most-recent)

Hi guys, I have simulated a simple "hello world" example on two different versions of GEM5. I have got two different "system.cpu.numCycles" results in both simulations. In both simulations, I have been using the same configurations (linux image, vm, caches, ...etc). I will list the parts of the c