Hi,
I am simulating a 3-level cache hierarchy (private L1 and L2, shared L3)
which has variable read and write latencies. I modified the files in m5's
src/mem/cache directory and wherever latency was getting added to the timer
tick, I check if the request is a write request. The code  looks like this:

time = curTick + latency;

is modified as

if (pkt->isWrite())
   time = curTick + writeHitlatency;
else
   time = curTick + latency;

I'm trying to measure the sensitivity of write latencies to the performance
of PARSEC workloads. Since M5 supports PARSEC in full-system mode, I'm
running m5 in FS mode (using the binaries and scripts provided by UT-Austin)
and use checkpointing for faster simulation. However, most PARSEC workloads
segfault for input sizes larger than simdev (they run fine for test and
simdev) after simulating for close to an hour. I will share the stack trace
of the simulation, but before that I wanted to get a few questions cleared.

Btw, I use the latest m5 code repository.

My questions are as follows:

*) Is it possible to simulate a cache with variable read and write latencies
or are there any intricacies in the m5 codebase that stops us from
simulating such a cache? If it is possible, is the code snippet above the
correct way of simulating such a cache or are there any special cases that
should be handled correctly for the code to work?

*) I'm currently using 12 clock cycle write latency for L1-I and L1-D cache
(the read latency is 1 and 3 clock cycles for L1-I and L1-D cache) and 30
cycle write latency for an L2 cache (read is 20 clock cycles). Does these
values matter or would m5 take care of simulating these high latency writes
correctly?

*) Has anyone already tried simulating caches which have variable read and
write latencies? If so, have you encountered any problems or issues that
should be addressed?

Any pointers on solving this will be highly appreciated.
Thanks a lot.

-- 
Bhushan
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev

Reply via email to