> > <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
> >
> > Processors will always execute SOME code somewhere -- pstats is
> > agnostic
> > to which code is executed. That is, even the execution of
> the OS idle
> > loop will cause the pstats instruction counts to increment-- you
> > cannot
> > assume processors that you do not assign tasks do not execute
> > instructions.
> >
> > Zhang Yu wrote:
> > > Thanks for the reply. However, what I mean of pstats is
> already a
> > > delta of the instructions (I did the calculation myself).
> And in my
> > > case, the number of instructions executed by each processor
> > should not
> > > be equal or similar.
> > >
> > > Yu
> > >
> > > On Jan 29, 2008 12:15 PM, Dan Gibson <
degibson@xxxxxxxx
> <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx>
> > <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx>>
> > > <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx <mailto:
degibson@xxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
> > >
> > > The number of instructions reported by ruby is a delta
> > between the
> > > initial instruction count and the final instruction
> count. The
> > > number of
> > > instructions reported by pstats is a total instruction
> count,
> > > staring at
> > > boot-time if I am not mistaken. Hence the discrepancy.
> > >
> > > Zhang Yu wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I'm using Gems2.0 with Simics3.0.30. While I run the
> > simulation with
> > > > multiple cores, the statistics dumped by ruby seems
> to be
> > > > unreasonable. For example, when I use "taskset"
> command to
> > assign a
> > > > single task to a certain processor, instruction_executed
> > for all the
> > > > processors are almost the same in the ruby statistics.
> > However, if I
> > > > use "pstats" command in simics, I can see obviously that
> > the certain
> > > > processor executed much more instructions than other
> > processors. So,
> > > > is there anything I can do to make the ruby stats
> seems more
> > > reasonable?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Yu
> > > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Gems-users mailing list
> > > >
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:
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.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~gibson
> <
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/%7Egibson>
> > <
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/%7Egibson>
> <
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/%7Egibson>
> > > [esc]:wq!
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Gems-users mailing list
> > >
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx