Hi David, I have not seen this mmap error before, and my initial guess was the mmap error is happening because you are trying to allocate more memory than we created when mmap'ing the inputs for the applications (we do this to speed up SE mode, because otherwise initializing arrays can take several hours). However, the fact that it is failing in physical.cc and not in the application itself is throwing me off there. Looking at where the failure is occurring, it seems the backing store code itself is failing here (from such a large allocation). Since the failure is with a C++ mmap call itself, that is perhaps more problematic - is "Cannot allocate memory" the failure from the perror() call on the line above the fatal() print?
Regarding the other question, and the failures more generally: we have never tested with > 64 CUs before, so certainly you are stressing the system and encountering different kinds of failures than we have seen previously. In terms of applications, I had thought most/all of them passed previously, but we do not test each and every one all the time because this would make our weekly regressions run for a very long time. You can see here: https://gem5.googlesource.com/public/gem5/+/refs/heads/develop/tests/weekly.sh#176 which ones we run on a weekly basis. I expect all of those to pass (although your comment seems to indicate that is not always true?). Your issues are exposing that perhaps we need to test more of them beyond these 3 - perhaps on a quarterly basis or something though to avoid inflating the weekly runtime. Having said that, I have not run LRN in a long time, as some ML people told me that LRN was not widely used anymore. But when I did run it, I do remember it requiring a large amount of memory - which squares with what you are seeing here. I thought LRN needed -mem-size=32 GB to run, but based on your message it seems that is not the case. @Matt P: have you tried LRN lately? If so, have you run into the same OOM/backing store failures? I know Kyle R. is looking into your other failure, so this one may have to wait behind it from our end, unless Matt P knows of a fix. Thanks, Matt From: David Fong via gem5-users <gem5-users@gem5.org> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2022 4:38 PM To: David Fong via gem5-users <gem5-users@gem5.org> Cc: David Fong <da...@chronostech.com> Subject: [gem5-users] gem5 : X86 + GCN3 (gfx801) + test_fwd_lrn Hi, I'm getting an error related to memory for test_fwd_lrn I increased the memory size from 4GB to 512GB I got memory size issue : "out of memory". build/GCN3_X86/gpu-compute/gpu_compute_driver.cc:599: warn: unimplemented ioctl: AMDKFD_IOC_SET_SCRATCH_BACKING_VA build/GCN3_X86/gpu-compute/gpu_compute_driver.cc:609: warn: unimplemented ioctl: AMDKFD_IOC_SET_TRAP_HANDLER build/GCN3_X86/sim/mem_pool.cc:120: fatal: fatal condition freePages() <= 0 occurred: Out of memory, please increase size of physical memory. But once I increased mem size to 1024GB, 1536GB,2048GB I'm getting this DRAM device capacity issue. docker run --rm -v ${PWD}:${PWD} -v ${PWD}/gem5/gem5-resources/src/gpu/DNNMark/cachefiles:/root/.cache/miopen/2.9.0 -w ${PWD} gcr.io/gem5-test/gcn-gpu:v21-2 gem5/build/GCN3_X86/gem5.opt gem5/configs/example/apu_se.py --mem-size 1536GB --num-compute-units 256 -n3 --benchmark-root=gem5/gem5-resources/src/gpu/DNNMark/build/benchmarks/test_fwd_lrn -cdnnmark_test_fwd_lrn --options="-config gem5/gem5-resources/src/gpu/DNNMark/config_example/lrn_config.dnnmark -mmap gem5/gem5-resources/src/gpu/DNNMark/mmap.bin" |& tee gem5_gpu_cu256_run_dnnmark_test_fwd_lrn_50latency.log Global frequency set at 1000000000000 ticks per second build/GCN3_X86/mem/mem_interface.cc:791: warn: DRAM device capacity (8192 Mbytes) does not match the address range assigned (2097152 Mbytes) mmap: Cannot allocate memory build/GCN3_X86/mem/physical.cc:231: fatal: Could not mmap 1649267441664 bytes for range [0:0x18000000000]! Smaller number of CUs like 4 also have same type of error. Is there a regression script or regression log for DNNMark to show mem-size or configurations that are known working for DNNMark tests so I can use same setup to run a few DNNMark tests? Only test_fwd_softmax, test_bwd_softmax are working for CUs from {4,8,16,32,64,128,256} Thanks, David
_______________________________________________ gem5-users mailing list -- gem5-users@gem5.org To unsubscribe send an email to gem5-users-le...@gem5.org %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
