If you divide the total flits by total cycles by 16, you can see that
the injection rate is only 0.0009 flits/cycle/node. Hence your power is
so low.
The total network energy might be an alternate metric that you might
want to consider instead of power to remove cycles from the picture.
Take a look at src/mem/ruby/network/orion/NetworkPower.cc where the
energy and power calculations are done.
For a relative comparison, the numbers from Orion might work for you...
You could compare the energy numbers for each component from Orion and
DSENT if you want to see how much they differ.
The cache sizes are in configs/common/Options.py
On 09/12/2012 03:26 PM, Pavan Poluri wrote:
Hi Tushar,
The simulation ran for 5,400,912,679 cycles. How do I reduce the cache
sizes? Which source files do I need to modify?
I was also looking into DSENT tool. To the extent I understood, the
current version of DSENT does not model the power of the Virtual
Channel Allocation stage. It only models the power for buffer,
crossbar, switch allocator and clock. I really need to calculate the
power of the Virtual Channel Allocation stage.
Thanks for your help.
Thanks,
Pavan
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Tushar Krishna <tus...@csail.mit.edu
<mailto:tus...@csail.mit.edu>> wrote:
Hi Pavan,
There are two issues here.
One, as Mitch pointed out, is that Orion is not entirely accurate.
I would suggest computing activity counts from garnet and feeding
them to DSENT.
However, I have a feeling you will see a similar phenomenon
(dynamic power >> leakage power) even with DSENT.
How many cycles did your simulation run for?
For full system runs in gem5, the network activity is typically
very low (since network gets flits only on cache misses).
As a result your dynamic power is very low.
Network activity can be increased by reducing cache sizes.
cheers,
Tushar
On Sep 12, 2012, at 1:43 PM, Pavan Poluri wrote:
Hi,
Thanks a lot for your detailed reply.
Thanks,
Pavan
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Mitch Hayenga
<mitch.hayenga+g...@gmail.com
<mailto:mitch.hayenga+g...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,
I wouldn't trust the power model. Garnet is based on Orion,
which in the last year a few papers have shown to be quite
inaccurate (mostly because its internal model doesn't scale
some technology parameters properly).
More Information:
1. Peh's group recently announced a more accurate power
modeling tool called DSENT
(https://sites.google.com/site/mitdsent/). In their paper
they highlight many issues with Orion and (at the 45nm node)
find it capable of being off by ~10x in power.
2. I published a WDDD paper on Orion showing my own brief
investigation into why its power/area numbers seemed
disconnected with reality.
(http://www.ece.wisc.edu/~hayenga/papers/wddd2012_hayenga.pdf
<http://www.ece.wisc.edu/%7Ehayenga/papers/wddd2012_hayenga.pdf>)
Hope this helps. Maybe the version of Orion integrated with
Ruby/gem5 has received some updates, but unless you've heard
otherwise, I wouldn't trust it.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Mitch Hayenga
<mitch.haye...@gmail.com <mailto:mitch.haye...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,
I wouldn't trust the power model. Garnet is based on
Orion, which in the last year a few papers have shown to
be quite inaccurate (mostly because its internal model
doesn't scale some technology parameters properly).
More Information:
1. Peh's group recently announced a more accurate power
modeling tool called DSENT
(https://sites.google.com/site/mitdsent/). In their
paper they highlight many issues with Orion and (at the
45nm node) find it capable of being off by ~10x in power.
2. I published a WDDD paper on Orion showing my own brief
investigation into why its power/area numbers seemed
disconnected with reality.
(http://www.ece.wisc.edu/~hayenga/papers/wddd2012_hayenga.pdf
<http://www.ece.wisc.edu/%7Ehayenga/papers/wddd2012_hayenga.pdf>)
Hope this helps. Maybe the version of Orion integrated
with Ruby/gem5 has received some updates, but unless
you've heard otherwise, I wouldn't trust it.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Pavan Poluri
<poluripa...@gmail.com <mailto:poluripa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello,
I have executed the Blackscholes application of the
PARSEC benchmark suite with 16 threads on the input
file set (in_4.txt) with a full system simulation
with 16 cores, 16 L2 caches and 16 directories on a
mesh topology with 4 rows. I have used the
MOESI_CMP_directory protocol. The technology used is
90nm with a clock frequency of 1GHz and operating
voltage VDD of 1.2V. I was going through the power
statistics in the ruby.stats file. The following are
the power numbers from the simulation.
Router Dynamic Power = 0.00710691 W => 0.4441 mW per
router
Router Static Power = 0.452366 W => 28.272 mW per router
Router Clock Power = 0.541901 W
I am confused with these power numbers. The dynamic
power is very very less compared to the static power.
I do not understand why the dynamic power is so low
even when the simulation resulted in the injection of
75,899,868 flits and the successful reception of
75,899,865 flits. Am I doing something wrong with the
simulation? Do I need to set some parameters for the
power calculations?
Thanks for your time.
Thanks,
Pavan
_______________________________________________
gem5-users mailing list
gem5-users@gem5.org <mailto:gem5-users@gem5.org>
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
--
Mitch Hayenga
mitch.haye...@gmail.com <mailto:mitch.haye...@gmail.com>
_______________________________________________
gem5-users mailing list
gem5-users@gem5.org <mailto:gem5-users@gem5.org>
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
_______________________________________________
gem5-users mailing list
gem5-users@gem5.org <mailto:gem5-users@gem5.org>
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
_______________________________________________
gem5-users mailing list
gem5-users@gem5.org <mailto:gem5-users@gem5.org>
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
_______________________________________________
gem5-users mailing list
gem5-users@gem5.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
_______________________________________________
gem5-users mailing list
gem5-users@gem5.org
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
