I agree that this is surprising, but it's hard for me to say if it is
"right" or "wrong" without a lot more digging. If you find that this is a
bug, please post a patch! We'd be happy to review and incorporate a fix.
Jason
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:26 AM Ayaz Akram wrote:
> Hi Jason, thanks fo
Hi Jason, thanks for replying. Actually, I am using SE mode and currently
relying on printings from the benchmarks themselves (these are SPEC2006
benchmarks). I expect that due to different implementation of syscalls,
some executed portion can be different, but even the printings from
benchmarks fo
Hi,
Another difference between ARM and x86 is the OS that you're using. Maybe
the different paths are actually different paths through the OS (or
interrupts, etc.) and not different paths through your binaries. Even in SE
mode there may be different code paths based on how the syscalls are
impleme
Hello !
I am trying to use gem5 pseudo instructions inside code of a benchmark to
create checkpoints at certain points in program execution (after pseudo
instruction is called for a specific number of times). The benchmark is
compiled for both Arm and x86. Once checkpoint is created I run the
benc
