Hi,

Can anyone tell me what the syntax of using checkpoint_aggregator.py is? I
find there is little usage information inside the file.

Thanks,
Leonard



On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Susie Sally <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Lisa,
>
> Thank you very much. I appreciated it!
>
> Susie
>
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:15 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Send m5-users mailing list submissions to
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>
>>        http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of m5-users digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>   1. Re: m5threads (Lisa Hsu)
>>   2. Re: running multi-program workloads with individual
>>      checkpoints for each program (Lisa Hsu)
>>   3. Re: running multi-program workloads with
>>      individualcheckpoints for each program (Sujay Phadke)
>>   4. Re: running multi-program workloads with
>>      individualcheckpoints for each program (Korey Sewell)
>>   5. Re: running multi-program workloads       withindividualcheckpoints
>>      for each program (Sujay Phadke)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 09:30:27 -0700
>> From: Lisa Hsu <[email protected]>
>> To: M5 users mailing list <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] m5threads
>> Message-ID:
>>        <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> As far as I know, no one has touched m5threads in a long time. I don't
>> think
>> there is any documentation aside from the README either, aside from any
>> comments you might find in the code or discussions that might be on the
>> mailing list archive.
>>
>> Lisa
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Matthew Horsnell <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > I've got a couple of questions about m5threads:
>> >
>> > Is anyone actively maintaining the m5threads repository?
>> > Does anyone know which of the architectures is fully supported (as far
>> as I
>> > can tell there is partial support for x86 and sparc)?
>> > Is there any documentation for using m5threads (supplimentary of the
>> README
>> > file).
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Matt
>>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > m5-users mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/m5-users/attachments/20100629/3774996e/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 09:36:52 -0700
>> From: Lisa Hsu <[email protected]>
>> To: M5 users mailing list <[email protected]>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] running multi-program workloads with
>>        individual      checkpoints for each program
>> Message-ID:
>>        <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>
>> Hi Susie,
>>
>> The code for that has been checked into the development repository.  It's
>> in
>> the util/ directory and is called checkpoint-aggregator.py.
>>
>> Lisa
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Susie Sally <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I would like to run simulations with multiple workloads with restoring
>> an
>> > individual checkpoint for each program.
>> >
>> > I read this thread
>> > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02870.html from the
>> > archive.
>> >
>> > I will very much appreciate if you can point me to the mentioned patch
>> or
>> > give me pointers for the required modifications to do this.
>> >
>> > thank you very much.
>> >
>> > regards,
>> >
>> > Susie
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > m5-users mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/m5-users/attachments/20100629/7815e750/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:14:47 -0400
>> From: "Sujay Phadke" <[email protected]>
>> To: "M5 users mailing list" <[email protected]>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] running multi-program workloads with
>>        individualcheckpoints for each program
>> Message-ID: <575C68AB497044E78FCF6DBE68D08375@eecslowpower>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>
>> For multi-programmed workloads, I have a clean solution now to the problem
>> referred to in the thread:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02832.html
>>
>> We need to ensure each core completes atleast max_insts_all_thread
>> instructions. The default implementation exits as soon as any 1 core reaches
>> that count. I created a new exit event called which counts the total system
>> events and puts an exit event on the main Q only when all cores have
>> completed the required instructions. Further, it can dump stats whenever a
>> particular core has reached that count, giving the effect of "freezing"
>> stats for that core for max_insts instructions.
>>
>> I can send a patch for this if interested. Has anyone else implemented
>> this?
>>
>> Sujay
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Lisa Hsu
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 12:36 PM
>>
>> To: M5 users mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] running multi-program workloads with
>> individualcheckpoints for each program
>>
>>
>> Hi Susie,
>>
>>
>> The code for that has been checked into the development repository.  It's
>> in the util/ directory and is called checkpoint-aggregator.py.
>>
>>
>> Lisa
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Susie Sally <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>  Hi,
>>
>>  I would like to run simulations with multiple workloads with restoring an
>> individual checkpoint for each program.
>>
>>  I read this thread
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02870.html from the
>> archive.
>>
>>  I will very much appreciate if you can point me to the mentioned patch or
>> give me pointers for the required modifications to do this.
>>
>>  thank you very much.
>>
>>  regards,
>>
>>  Susie
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  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
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/m5-users/attachments/20100629/6c58e740/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:31:35 -0400
>> From: Korey Sewell <[email protected]>
>> To: M5 users mailing list <[email protected]>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] running multi-program workloads with
>>        individualcheckpoints for each program
>> Message-ID:
>>        <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>
>> > I can send a patch for this if interested. Has anyone else implemented
>> > this?
>> >
>> At some point we had in the tree where when a thread called the exit
>> system
>> call, the system would check the threadcontexts in the system and only
>> called "exitSimLoop" if there was only 1 thread active in the system.
>>
>> I think Steve (?) removed it on a code update given that it's not
>> necessarily clear that counting the number of threads that are active is a
>> good indicator of if the workload calling exit should really exit or not.
>> I'm not sure about the reason, so maybe Steve could comment or a double
>> check of the archives is in order because I do remember a similar
>> functionality to this inside of M5 previously.
>>
>> I dont think there was anything about "freezing" stats though. So with
>> regards to that patch, I guess it wouldnt hurt to post it on reviewboard
>> though so that people can comment on it and potentially get it into the
>> tree.
>> --
>> - Korey
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/m5-users/attachments/20100629/50fc0985/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 16:15:35 -0400
>> From: "Sujay Phadke" <[email protected]>
>> To: "M5 users mailing list" <[email protected]>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] running multi-program workloads
>>        withindividualcheckpoints for each program
>> Message-ID: <625F6966332B495D80252DFC519F9D34@eecslowpower>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>
>> if we have just 1 thread/core and n cores. how would the current
>> functionality be suited for this? In my implementation, the remaining
>> workloads keep executing, since we want a multi-workload behaviour. But it
>> makes sure that all cores reach the max_insts count. Isnt that the expected
>> behaviour?
>>
>> Sujay
>>
>>
>> From: Korey Sewell
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 2:31 PM
>> To: M5 users mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [m5-users] running multi-program workloads
>> withindividualcheckpoints for each program
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  I can send a patch for this if interested. Has anyone else implemented
>> this?
>> At some point we had in the tree where when a thread called the exit
>> system call, the system would check the threadcontexts in the system and
>> only called "exitSimLoop" if there was only 1 thread active in the system.
>>
>> I think Steve (?) removed it on a code update given that it's not
>> necessarily clear that counting the number of threads that are active is a
>> good indicator of if the workload calling exit should really exit or not.
>> I'm not sure about the reason, so maybe Steve could comment or a double
>> check of the archives is in order because I do remember a similar
>> functionality to this inside of M5 previously.
>>
>> I dont think there was anything about "freezing" stats though. So with
>> regards to that patch, I guess it wouldnt hurt to post it on reviewboard
>> though so that people can comment on it and potentially get it into the
>> tree.
>>
>> --
>> - Korey
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> m5-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/m5-users/attachments/20100629/008d04df/attachment.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> m5-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>>
>> End of m5-users Digest, Vol 47, Issue 41
>> ****************************************
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> m5-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
>



-- 
Give our ability to our work, but our genius to our life!
_______________________________________________
m5-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users

Reply via email to