Re: [Gems-users] L1 bypassing?

[Mike Marty <mikem@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hmmm..this protocol should show L1 and L2 stats just fine.

The *_1level protocols would show zero L1 stats.  You didn't happen to
build one of these protocols, did you?

--Mike


> Hi,
>
> I used MOSI_SMP_bcast.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> On Thursday 22 September 2005 08:40 pm, Mike Marty wrote:
> > Chris,
> >
> > I suspect that the protocol you used doesn't have L1 cache statistics
> > hooked up correctly.  Which protocol was this?
> >
> > --Mike
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > after a simulation of a uniprocessor machine with warm caches, I got the
> > > following results:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------------
> > > L1D_cache cache stats:
> > >   L1D_cache_total_misses: 0
> > >   L1D_cache_total_demand_misses: 0
> > >   L1D_cache_total_prefetches: 0
> > >   L1D_cache_total_sw_prefetches: 0
> > >   L1D_cache_total_hw_prefetches: 0
> > >   L1D_cache_misses_per_transaction: 0
> > >   L1D_cache_misses_per_instruction: 0
> > >   L1D_cache_instructions_per_misses: NaN
> > >
> > >   L1D_cache_request_size: [binsize: log2 max: 0 count: 0 average: NaN
> > >
> > > |standard
> > >
> > > deviation: NaN | 0 ]
> > >
> > > L1I_cache cache stats:
> > >   L1I_cache_total_misses: 0
> > >   L1I_cache_total_demand_misses: 0
> > >   L1I_cache_total_prefetches: 0
> > >   L1I_cache_total_sw_prefetches: 0
> > >   L1I_cache_total_hw_prefetches: 0
> > >   L1I_cache_misses_per_transaction: 0
> > >   L1I_cache_misses_per_instruction: 0
> > >   L1I_cache_instructions_per_misses: NaN
> > >
> > >   L1I_cache_request_size: [binsize: log2 max: 0 count: 0 average: NaN
> > >
> > > |standard
> > >
> > > deviation: NaN | 0 ]
> > >
> > > L2_cache cache stats:
> > >   L2_cache_total_misses: 74762
> > >   L2_cache_total_demand_misses: 42876
> > >   L2_cache_total_prefetches: 31886
> > >   L2_cache_total_sw_prefetches: 31886
> > >   L2_cache_total_hw_prefetches: 0
> > >   L2_cache_misses_per_transaction: 74762
> > >   L2_cache_misses_per_instruction: 7.4762e-05
> > >   L2_cache_instructions_per_misses: 13375.8
> > > ----------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > What confuses me is that there are L2 misses, but no L1 misses, which
> > > seems to be a contradiction if inclusive caches are used. How can the
> > > result be explained? And from where can I get the total number of
> > > accesses to the individual levels to compute the miss rate?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Gems-users mailing list
> > > Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gems-users mailing list
> > Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gems-users mailing list
> Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
>