* build/X86_FS/tests/fast/quick/10.linux-boot/x86/linux/pc-simple-atomic
FAILED!
* build/X86_FS/tests/fast/quick/10.linux-boot/x86/linux/pc-simple-timing
FAILED!
* build/ALPHA_SE/tests/fast/quick/60.rubytest/alpha/linux/rubytest-ruby
passed.
*
Hi Brad,
I found the problem that was causing this error. Specifically, it is
this changeset:
changeset: 7909:eee578ed2130
user:Joel Hestness hestn...@cs.utexas.edu
date:Sun Feb 06 22:14:18 2011 -0800
summary: Ruby: Fix to return cache block size to CPU for split data
Which lines are you commenting out to get it to work? It's a bit
unclear in the diff you point to (maybe because you said it's a full
set of changes, not just one)
(btw: The work I've been doing is comparing the old m5 memory trace
to the gem5 memory trace to try to chase down the bug. I
Thanks Malek. Very interesting.
Yes, this 5 line changeset seems rather benign, but actually has huge
ramifications. With this change, the RubyPort passes the correct block size to
the cpu/device models. Without it, I believe the block size defaults to 0 or
1...I can't remember which.
Hi Malek,
Just to reiterate, I don't think my patches will fix the underlining problem.
Instead, my patches just fix various corner cases in the protocols. I suspect
these corner cases are never actually reached in real execution.
The fact that your dma traces point out that the Ruby and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/552/#review958
---
Hi Somayeh,
I just have one larger issue to mention, then a few minor
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/578/
---
Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe Black, Steve Reinhardt, and Nathan
On 2011-03-14 15:54:41, Brad Beckmann wrote:
Hi Somayeh,
I just have one larger issue to mention, then a few minor comments. See below
for details. The larger issue is that I believe one of the transitions you
specify is unecessary (see specific comments below). In general, be very
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/578/
---
(Updated 2011-03-14 17:34:17.189549)
Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe
Reviewboard is complaining about posting consecutive changesets to the board
for some reason. When I view the diff it gives an error message about not
being able to apply the patch. So for now, I just posted both patches
merged and will split on commit.
Anyone else run into this problem?
On
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/583/
---
Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe Black, Steve Reinhardt, and Nathan
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/583/
---
(Updated 2011-03-14 17:39:33.764506)
Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe
12 matches
Mail list logo
