It's probably failing because the hypervisor and open boot binaries are
slightly different. I imagine it's working fine.

Ali


On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:21:37 +0530, prasun gera <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Now, after using a modified solaris image, the regression is running
> as expected as far as I can see. i.e The last line on simout is
> Exiting @ tick 2222503770 because m5_exit instruction encountered,
> which means that it is running the halt script after booting solaris.
> However, on the terminal, the regression ends with
> *****
>
build/SPARC_FS/tests/opt/long/80.solaris-boot/sparc/solaris/t1000-simple-atomic
> FAILED!
> It prints  all the output differences from the reference directory
> which mainly include differenecs in paths and versions. I can post the
> diff if its relevant. After the diff, the last few lines of the output
> were:
> 
> scons: *** Error 1
> ===== Statistics differences =====
> Maximum error magnitude: +0.504705%
> 
>                                   Reference  New Value   Abs Diff   Pct
Chg
> Key statistics:
> 
>   host_inst_rate                    2338829     883942   -1454887  
-62.21%
>   host_mem_usage                     501616     424220     -77396  
-15.43%
>   sim_insts                      2229160714 2217967932  -11192782   
-0.50%
>   sim_ticks                      2233777512 2222503770  -11273742   
-0.50%
> 
> Largest 20 relative errors (> 0%):
> 
>   sim_insts                      2229160714 2217967932  -11192782   
-0.50%
>   sim_seconds                      1.116889   1.111252  -0.005637   
-0.50%
>   sim_ticks                      2233777512 2222503770  -11273742   
-0.50%
>   system.cpu.numCycles           2233777513 2222503771  -11273742   
-0.50%
>   system.cpu.num_insts           2229160714 2217967932  -11192782   
-0.50%
>   system.cpu.num_refs             547951940  546386922   -1565018   
-0.29%
> 
> *****
>
build/SPARC_FS/tests/opt/long/80.solaris-boot/sparc/solaris/t1000-simple-atomic
> FAILED!
> 
> scons: done building targets.
> 
> I couldn't find any specific error in the output. Is it failing
> because of some difference from the reference? Can this be ignored?
> 
> 
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I guess I must have modified the disk image to support the m5 style
>> runfile
>> command. The trouble is I don't think we can distribute a modified
>> solaris
>> disk image.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ali
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 19, 2010, at 2:23 PM, prasun gera wrote:
>>
>>> And while running fs.py, after entering the login, the simulation
>>> lasted for 5 minutes or so, which is more than earlier, before
>>> terminating at max_tick. If there is a way around the solaris prompt,
>>> please let me know.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 6:22 PM, prasun gera <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Ali,
>>>> Now, after updating nvram1, the first problem is resolved. i.e. opb
>>>> boots automatically. However, the regression gets stuck at the solaris
>>>> login prompt. The terminal output in the reference directory is
>>>> ....
>>>> ....
>>>> iscsi0 at root
>>>> iscsi0 is /iscsi
>>>> Hostname: unknown
>>>> Loading M5 readfile script...
>>>>
>>>> whereas my output is
>>>> .....
>>>> .....
>>>> iscsi0 at root
>>>> iscsi0 is /iscsi
>>>> Hostname: unknown
>>>> ^M
>>>> unknown console login:
>>>>
>>>> So, I suppose the login also needs to be automated.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no facility built into M5 to do this. You could do something
>>>>> to
>>>>> copy the data out after you write it (the file is just loaded into
>>>>> RAM),
>>>>> or
>>>>> you could use the functional simulation from the that came with the
>>>>> images
>>>>> to modify the file and save it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ali
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 01:11:56 +0530, prasun gera
>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I tried setting auto-boot? true with the following command:
>>>>>> setenv auto-boot? true
>>>>>> However, it sets the value only for the current session and doesn't
>>>>>> last after i restart the simulation. Is there a way around?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 4:47 AM, prasun gera <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, I had used boot as the boot string and it used to boot
solaris.
>>>>>>> i.e It used to boot till the terminal stopped at the following
>>>>>>> prompt:
>>>>>>> ....
>>>>>>> ....
>>>>>>> Loading: /platform/SUNW,Sun-Fire-T2000/ufsboot
>>>>>>> Loading: /platform/sun4v/ufsboot
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Copyright 1983-2005 Sun Microsystems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
>>>>>>> Use is subject to license terms.
>>>>>>> Hostname: unknown
>>>>>>> unknown console login:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At this prompt, the couple of times when I was quick enough, I
could
>>>>>>> enter root as the login and I could see the solaris promt, shortly
>>>>>>> after which m5 used to exit. At other times,
>>>>>>> m5 would just quit at the 'unknown console login' prompt. Can you
>>>>>>> tell
>>>>>>> me where I need to change the boot settings for it to boot
>>>>>>> automatically? Also, does the console login string need to be
passed
>>>>>>> automatically? Or is it normal to enter it manually?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Prasun
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 4:21 AM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If your previous simulations were sitting at the ok prompt, that
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> explain it. The settings aren't compile in, but rather are saved
>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> nvram blob that is loaded. If you connect to the simulator and
>>>>>>>> provide
>>>>>
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> proper boot string (I can't remember what one is, maybe just
boot),
>>>>>
>>>>> does
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> boot into Solaris?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ali
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 03:33:36 +0530, prasun gera
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm running the solaris boot regression test right now with the
>>>>>
>>>>> command
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> line
>>>>>>>>> scons build/SPARC_FS/tests/opt/long/80.solaris-boot
>>>>>>>>> but it seems to be stuck since openboot expects a manual boot
>>>>>>>>> command.
>>>>>>>>> My system.t1000.pterm shows:
>>>>>>>>> ^Qcpu Probing I/O buses
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sun Fire T2000, No Keyboard
>>>>>>>>> Copyright 2005 Sun Microsystems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
>>>>>>>>> OpenBoot 4.20.0, 256 MB memory available, Serial #1122867.
>>>>>>>>> [mo23723 obp4.20.0 #0]
>>>>>>>>> Ethernet address 0:80:3:de:ad:3, Host ID: 80112233.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ok
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> where I used to enter the boot command at the ok prompt while
>>>>>>>>> running
>>>>>>>>> fs.py.
>>>>>>>>> However, the corresponding file in the reference directory shows
>>>>>>>>> ^Qcpu
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sun Fire T2000, No Keyboard
>>>>>>>>> Copyright 2006 Sun Microsystems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
>>>>>>>>> OpenBoot 4.23.0, 256 MB memory available, Serial #1122867.
>>>>>>>>> [saidi obp #30]
>>>>>>>>> Ethernet address 0:80:3:de:ad:3, Host ID: 80112233.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Boot device: /virtual-devices/d...@0  File and args: -vV
>>>>>>>>> Loading ufs-file-system package 1.4 04 Aug 1995 13:02:54.
>>>>>>>>> FCode UFS Reader 1.12 00/07/17 15:48:16.
>>>>>>>>> Loading: /platform/SUNW,Sun-Fire-T2000/ufsboot
>>>>>>>>> Loading: /platform/sun4v/ufsboot
>>>>>>>>> ......
>>>>>>>>> ......
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It seems to me that the openboot binary you used for the
>>>>>>>>> regression
>>>>>>>>> was configured to autoboot. Do I need to recompile openssparc t1
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> openboot configured for autoboot?  Also, does this explain my
>>>>>>>>> earlier
>>>>>>>>> problem of m5 exiting at max_tick?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Prasun
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can you run the SPARC_FS regression successfully?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ali
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 16, 2010, at 8:11 PM, prasun gera wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> 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

Reply via email to