Forgot that I edited a cc file and not a script and hence didn't rebuild. I suppose this won't happen once i rebuild m5.
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 7:19 AM, prasun gera <[email protected]> wrote: > Ali, > I saw the simulate(Tick num_cycles) function in > build/SPARC_FS/sim/simulate.cc and it has the following lines of code > (lines 58 to 60) > > Event *limit_event = > new SimLoopExitEvent("simulate() limit reached", 0); > mainEventQueue.schedule(limit_event, num_cycles); > > As far as I can tell, this is the only place where a limit_event is > added to the event queue. (and should be the only one right?) So I > commented the aforementioned lines out just to see what happens. > However, m5 still exit with same error message about limit being > reached. I expected m5 to exit with an assert failure(inside the > following while loop) since the queue would be empty after the event > before the limit_event is executed, but that didn't happen. So does > it mean that another(possibly interfering) limit_event was added to > the queue earlier? > > Thanks, > Prasun > > On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 3:08 AM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote: >> Prasun, >> >> I imagine what is happening is you're running the simple cpu, booting >> Solaris and then there is nothing to do, since you didn't specify >> anything. The only think that occurs after that point are timer >> interrupts which makes the simulation tick quite quickly up until you >> reach MaxTick. Have you looked at the terminal? What is the output >> there? >> >> Ali >> >> On Feb 14, 2010, at 2:33 PM, prasun gera wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> You mentioned that I'm using the O3 CPU model. Isn't the default model >>> simple atomic? I mean, I didn't pass any arguments to the script fs.py >>> and from setCPUClass, it seemed as though it is using the simple >>> atomic model. >>> In fact, later I tried the command line >>> >>> build/SPARC_FS/m5.opt -v -d /tmp/output/ configs/example/fs.py -d -- >>> caches >>> >>> to use the detailed CPU model but it threw an error >>> NameError: global name 'DerivO3CPU' is not defined. >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Gabriel Michael Black >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> It looks like the simulation ran out of things to do and stopped at >>>> the end of simulated time. You could use the Exec trace flag to see >>>> what, if anything, is executing when that happens. If the simulation >>>> runs for a while before failing, Exec will output a lot of text. >>>> You'll want to start tracing close to the interesting point. >>>> >>>> One other thing I notice is that you're using the O3 CPU model with >>>> SPARC_FS. While that model should work with SPARC_SE and SPARC_FS >>>> works with the simple CPUs, I don't know if anyone ever got the bugs >>>> worked out of that particular combination (someone please say >>>> something if you know otherwise). That makes me think that O3 is >>>> losing track of work that it needs to do, thinks it should become >>>> idle, and effectively goes to sleep and never wakes up. >>>> >>>> Gabe >>>> >>>> Quoting prasun gera <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> I could boot solaris in SPARC_FS, but m5 exited abruptly after that >>>>> with the following message: >>>>> Exiting @ cycle 9223372036854775807 because simulate() limit reached >>>>> >>>>> The command line I executed was: >>>>> build/SPARC_FS/m5.opt -v -d /tmp/output/ configs/example/fs.py >>>>> >>>>> Host system: Ubuntu 32 bit >>>>> >>>>> I tried it twice, and it quit at the same cycle count both the >>>>> times. >>>>> To ascertain whether the error was caused because of something I >>>>> did, >>>>> I didn't enter anything on the solaris terminal the second time. >>>>> i.e. >>>>> The computer was idle for the entire duration except for the boot >>>>> command on opb. Has anyone run into a similar error? Or any hints >>>>> regarding debugging this? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> The original binaries should work just fine, the _new versions >>>>>> were ones >>>>>> that we verified we could compile from source. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ali >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:50:07 +0530, prasun gera <[email protected] >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Figured it out. Copied the files to the binaries and disks >>>>>>> directories >>>>>>> and could run configs/example/fs.py after that. One small thing >>>>>>> though. The names of the solaris binaries used in m5 have new as a >>>>>>> suffix ( for eg. openboot_new.bin and q_new.bin). Does it mean >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> the original binaries from opensparc need to be modified in some >>>>>>> way? >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> m5-users mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> m5-users mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> m5-users mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> m5-users mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> m5-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> m5-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >> > _______________________________________________ m5-users mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
