Is it the build step or the run step that does the checksum?

specmake and specinvoke should both have flags that will generate the
commands for a build/run without actually invoking them.  Maybe something
on this page  http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/docs/runspec-avoidance.html will
help? (ex: the -n flag for specmake and specinvoke)

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:41 AM, Ankita (Garg) Goel <[email protected]>wrote:

> I specified check_md5=0 in the config file, plus --noreportable, but
> couldn't bypass the check *sigh*
>
> Has anyone done this before ?
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Paul Rosenfeld <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> I have successfully attempted to avoid SPEC and all of it's baggage in
>> recent years. If I recall correctly, there are some flags you can pass to
>> runspec to tell it that you don't want to do a "reportable" run.  Try to
>> add --noreportable (see 3.2.1 on this page:
>> http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/docs/runspec.html ) and see if that removes
>> the checksum check.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Ankita (Garg) Goel <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Paul for the quick response! I am new to using SPEC. I just tried
>>> to put some ptlcalls in the bzip2 source, but the compilation framework of
>>> SPEC (using runspec) seems to be checking for checksums. Any easy way to
>>> work around this ?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Paul Rosenfeld <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you can build your workload from source, the easiest approach to
>>>> doing this would be to add some region of interest hooks in the form of
>>>> ptlcalls to the source code. This way, you can create the checkpoint right
>>>> at the point of interest instead of running simulation execution from a
>>>> checkpoint of the shell.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Ankita (Garg) Goel <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a way I could fast-forward the execution of a benchmark for a
>>>>> few million of instructions before switching into the simulation mode ? 
>>>>> For
>>>>> instance, I create the checkpoint like below:
>>>>>
>>>>> # ./create_checkpoint bb; ./bzip2 <param>; ./stop_sim;
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, once I start marss again, from the above checkpoint 'bb', I want
>>>>> to fast-forward about 1million user instructions and then run simulation
>>>>> for the next few million instructions. Can I do this ? I did look around 
>>>>> in
>>>>> the archives, but did not find the answer there. Any suggestions/thoughts
>>>>> on this will greatly help me!
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ankita
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> http://www.marss86.org
>>>>> Marss86-Devel mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://www.cs.binghamton.edu/mailman/listinfo/marss86-devel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Ankita
>>> Graduate Student
>>> Department of Computer Science
>>> University of Texas at Austin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ankita
> Graduate Student
> Department of Computer Science
> University of Texas at Austin
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
http://www.marss86.org
Marss86-Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.cs.binghamton.edu/mailman/listinfo/marss86-devel

Reply via email to