Some debugging shows that this can be actually traced back to the random
number generator utility of the test case I use. I will see what I can do
here.
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Shuai Wang wrote:
> Hey Majid and Jason,
>
>
> Thank you so much for these detailed information. I learned a l
You must use the most recent version of HMC. Follow this patch
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3374/
Thanks
On Jan 5, 2017 9:30 PM, "Muzamil Rafique"
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to simulate HMC (hybrid memory cube) (files (*HMC.py,
> MemConfig.py, fs,py*) downloaded from http://reviews.gem5.org/r/
Hey Majid and Jason,
Thank you so much for these detailed information. I learned a lot from
them:) Now I am able to boot the full-system simulation and record the
cache status. I really appreciate your help!
While the current system works well on all the program binaries compiled
from C program
Hi,
I am trying to simulate HMC (hybrid memory cube) (files (*HMC.py,
MemConfig.py, fs,py*) downloaded from
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2986/diff/10/#2)
using command:
./build/ARM/gem5.opt configs/example/fs.py \
--mem-type=HMC_2500_x32 --mem-channels=16 \
--caches --l2cache \
Hi,
Thanks a lot for your help Pierre-Yves Péneau and Andreas Sandberg.
I have downloaded and used the repository at https://github.com/gem5/gem5.
I have also patched all the diffs in the Andreas email.
But I get following error while building the targets
scons build/ARM/gem5.fast PROTOCOL=MI_ex
Hi Shuai,
By default, se/fs.py use the atomic CPU, which performs atomic memory
accesses. This CPU/memory mode is used to fast-forward the simulation, and
does not accurately perform timing operations. All of the memory
requests/responses flow through the "atomic" functions (recvAtomic). You
shoul
