ong as there isn't an exit event scheduled, gem5 shouldn't exit the
> simulation before running the entire length when you restore a checkpoint.
>
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 8:59 AM muke101 via gem5-users
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, I'm generating simpoint checkpoints of s
Hi, I'm generating simpoint checkpoints of spec benchmarks by running the
programs through with the atomic CPU. One of them was interrupted in the middle
and so I want to restore from the last generated checkpoint and continue
generating the rest of the checkpoints from there, rather than starti
Hi, you need the --outdir flag and it has to come before you specify the config
script (like se.py), so it's passed to the gem5 binary directly:)
so:
./build/X86/gem5.fast --outdir=results configs/example/se.py
Sent from Proton Mail mobile
Original Message
On 8 Feb 2024,
Hi, just sharing some info I've found that look like a possible Gem5 bug:
Below around 1024 physical registers (for all three data types) memory usage is
at normal levels (around half a gb). At 1024 and beyond, memory usage reaches
incredibly high levels that even my machine with 500GB of memory
Hi all, I'm trying to run a highly scaled CPU configuration and finding that
individual Gem5 instances are using up to 250GB of memory with my new
configuration!! I'm wondering if anybody knows the most impactful parameters
for memory usage so I can decide what to try and tone down while still t
want to update the stack base, just add configuration like below:
> process.stackBase = 0x // new stack base value
> process.maxStackSize = 0x // stack size
>
> You can have a try, hope it helps.
>
> S2K
>
> At 2024-01-17 01:22:30, "muke101 via gem5-users"
ix this issue.
>
> Regards,
> S2K.
>
> At 2024-01-15 09:25:02, "muke101 via gem5-users" wrote:
>
>> Hi, thanks for the reply.
>>
>> Assuming that the page isn't being allocated when it should be, what could I
>> do with this information? I&#x
> firstly. You can enable the debug-flag of MMU to check whether the page
> related to this address is allocated when the image download is done.
>
> S2k
>
> At 2024-01-14 04:40:13, "muke101 via gem5-users" wrote:
>
>> Hi, I'm trying to checkpoint
Hi, I'm trying to checkpoint spec2017 with NonCachingSimpleCPU according to
simpoints I generated from native AArch64 binaries. On an unmodified Gem5, a
page fault occurs in the simulation (pasted the error message at the bottom).
I've read that GCC can run out of stack space when simulated, so
Might not be it but are you part of the KVM user group? Does it work if you run
gem5 under sudo?
Sent from Proton Mail mobile
Original Message
On 12 Jan 2024, 02:46, ChenShixuan via gem5-users wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am a beginner to use the Gem5. I am using kvm to run "x86-hel
Use a different script to take the checkpoint like configs/example/fs.py, which
does allow atomic cpu, then use the fs_power script to restore the checkpoint
with the timing cpu.
Sent from Proton Mail mobile
Original Message
On 17 Dec 2023, 15:11, saras nanda via gem5-users wr
Run with '--cpu-type=atomic' and then use the m5 command to create a checkpoint
from the terminal which can be restored with the timing CPU. It should take
around 10-20 minutes to get to login with atomic. If able, build and use
gem5.fast too.
Sent from Proton Mail mobile
Original Mes
Hey, this is perfectly expected as you're not using an atomic cpu model. Even
with atomic it'll take 10-20 minutes. It seems the fs_power.py script only
works with timing CPUs, so if you have to use that config (and can't switch to
something that lets you use atomic or better yet KVM), your best
Hi, I've been looking at how Gem5 executes loads in O3 for a research project
and there's something I've found in the code that I can't get my head around.
In lsq_unit.cc in the 'read' function, there's a loop for searching over the SQ
to try and find a matching store address to forward from. Ho
I'm generating checkpoints from spec for a research project. I have a use case
where I'm introducing novel instructions but they only have OoO core semantics
rather than program semantics, and any binary I modify to include them has the
exact same addresses for functions, basic blocks etc as an
Hi, I'm running simpoints of a custom compiled AArch64 GCC binary in gem5 to
generate checkpoints. After collecting around half the checkpoints for one of
the spec commands, it crashes with the following error:
`build/ARM/sim/faults.cc:102: panic: panic condition !handled &&
!tc->getSystemPtr()
I'm trying to set up full system emulation with aarch64. I can't use any SVE
instructions for my purposes so I've had to compile my own kernel with
'KCFLAGS=-march=armv8-a+nosve KCPPFLAGS=-march=armv8-a+nosve' set. I compiled
the bootloader from 'gem5/system/arm/bootloader' with SVE disabled as
17 matches
Mail list logo
