On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 3:46 AM, Stefan Neumann < [email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry, the formatting got a little messed up. > > Host1: > > > > > Host2: > > > > user uops > kernel uops > sim_cycle > user uops > kernel uops > sim_cycle 7210746924 > 1331578150 > 13797811843 > 7210744488 > 1331141836 > 13315031456 7210745232 > 1331564187 > 13767346806 > 7210744417 > 1331064636 > 13343311719 7210744826 > 1331475921 > 13803067702 > 7210745025 > 1331429686 > 13362192919 7210744068 > 1331046761 > 13778895729 > 7210745138 > 1331530721 > 13371649704 7210743664 > 1331602038 > 13741170045 > 7210746956 > 1332519415 > 13340211019 7210745221 > 1331551159 > 13765271526 > 7210744700 > 1332103942 > 13357991805 7210747188 > 1331712213 > 13739122442 > 7210744523 > 1331264662 > 13289832849 7210745019 > 1331550151 > 13758991929 > 7210744052 > 1331141885 > 13791512144 > > > This seems like an issue with VM's clock that was fixed in 0.3 release. Which version are you using? Can you give the 'HEAD' commit id? - Avadh > 2012/5/11 Stefan Neumann <[email protected]> > >> Hi, >> >> I am running some simulations of SPEC2006 benchmarks an noticed some >> variations of the sim_cycle count when I run MARSS on different host >> machines. >> >> Just an example: ROI of GemsFDTD >> >> I ran the simulation a couple of times on each host. >> >> Host1: Xeon X5670 @ 2.93GHz, dual socket, HT enabled >> Host2: Xeon X5675 @ 3.07GHz, dual socket, HT enabled >> OS configuration is exactly the same on both machines. >> >> Now when I compare the numbers: >> >> Host1: >> >> >> Host2: >> >> user uops kernel uops sim_cycles >> user uops kernel uops sim_cycles 7210746924 1331578150 13797811843 >> 7210744488 1331141836 13315031456 7210745232 1331564187 13767346806 >> 7210744417 1331064636 13343311719 7210744826 1331475921 13803067702 >> 7210745025 1331429686 13362192919 7210744068 1331046761 13778895729 >> 7210745138 1331530721 13371649704 7210743664 1331602038 13741170045 >> 7210746956 1332519415 13340211019 7210745221 1331551159 13765271526 >> 7210744700 1332103942 13357991805 7210747188 1331712213 13739122442 >> 7210744523 1331264662 13289832849 7210745019 1331550151 13758991929 >> 7210744052 1331141885 13791512144 >> The number of simulated instructions is pretty stable for all runs, but >> the sim_cycles, hence the IPC number differ. >> Any idea what the reason for this might be, as it seems that those >> differences more or less correlate with the clock rate of the host. >> >> Regards, >> Stefan >> > > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.marss86.org > Marss86-Devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.cs.binghamton.edu/mailman/listinfo/marss86-devel > >
_______________________________________________ http://www.marss86.org Marss86-Devel mailing list [email protected] https://www.cs.binghamton.edu/mailman/listinfo/marss86-devel
