Re: [Gems-users] Different numbers of instructions, msgs, etc when running Ruby on the same workload

["Lide Duan" <leaderduan@xxxxxxxxx>]

I implemented dimensional order routing, some kind of minimal adaptive routing and also a fully adaptive routing algorithms for torus networks. But according to Mike, the different amount of msgs may be due to the different amount of work between the two magic instructions when the different routing algorithms are utilized...

On 11/1/07, Niket <niketa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Can you tell more about the changes that you made.

I think that the interconnect might generate different amount of
messages due to routing.

Also, I am surprised that running Ruby twice gave you exactly the same
result. It is surprising that the OS did not cause any randomizations.

-Niket

Lide Duan wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> I have got some confusion about Ruby running on the same checkpoint...
>
> Basically I modified the routing algorithm utilized in the on-chip
> interconnect of Ruby, and compared the output results with the
> unmodified Ruby version. For both simulations, the checkpoint has been
> run from one magic instruction to the other, implying the same amount
> of work. I assumed that the msgs injected into the interconnect (from
> the components) should be the same for both cases because the only
> difference is the routing algorithm, which should not affect the
> behaviors on the cache level since all the msgs finally arrive to
> their corresponding destinations.
>
> However, the numbers of the injected msgs of the two runs have 5%
> difference, and the msgs generated in the interconnect (all of them
> are Invalidate_Control, to my observation) have more the 10%
> difference. The numbers of instructions of the two simulations are
> also different (but not much) although the two runs were from the same
> start point to the same end point.
>
> On the other hand, if I run Ruby twice without making any modification
> between the two runs ( i.e. the same Ruby on the same workload), the
> results are exactly the same. So I don't think there is any random
> effect to cause the above difference. Then, are the results I have got
> reasonable?
>
> Thanks,
> Lide
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gems-users mailing list
> Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
> Use Google to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding "site: https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/" to your search.
>
>

_______________________________________________
Gems-users mailing list
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
Use Google to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding "site: https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/" to your search.