Date: | Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:26:04 +0200 |
---|---|
From: | David Bonavila <david.bonavila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Subject: | Re: [Gems-users] Private L2 in a CMP... |
You are right, I confused unified and shared. I want a 2-core CMP with a 128KB private L2 cache (128KB per core). So, I have configured a 2 chip system, with 1 processor per chip: g_NUM_PROCESSORS: 2 g_PROCS_PER_CHIP: 1 and the Ruby stats file is: Chip Config ----------- Total_Chips: 2 L1Cache_L2cacheMemory numberPerChip: 1 Cache config: L1Cache_0_L2 cache_associativity: 2 num_cache_sets_bits: 10 num_cache_sets: 1024 cache_set_size_bytes: 65536 cache_set_size_Kbytes: 64 cache_set_size_Mbytes: 0.0625 cache_size_bytes: 131072 cache_size_Kbytes: 128 cache_size_Mbytes: 0.125 Is this configuration correct to simulate the 2-core with 128KB private L2?? On the other hand, the network latencies for a CMP with 1 chip, 2 procs per chip and MSI_MOSI_CMP_directory protocol, are the following: Network Configuration --------------------- network: SIMPLE_NETWORK topology: HIERARCHICAL_SWITCH virtual_net_0: active, ordered virtual_net_1: active, unordered virtual_net_2: active, ordered virtual_net_3: active, unordered virtual_net_4: active, unordered --- Begin Topology Print --- Topology print ONLY indicates the _NETWORK_ latency between two machines It does NOT include the latency within the machines L1Cache-0 Network Latencies L1Cache-0 -> L1Cache-1 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-0 -> L2Cache-0 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-0 -> L2Cache-1 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-0 -> Directory-0 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-0 -> Directory-1 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-1 Network Latencies L1Cache-1 -> L1Cache-0 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-1 -> L2Cache-0 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-1 -> L2Cache-1 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-1 -> Directory-0 net_lat: 9 L1Cache-1 -> Directory-1 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-0 Network Latencies L2Cache-0 -> L1Cache-0 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-0 -> L1Cache-1 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-0 -> L2Cache-1 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-0 -> Directory-0 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-0 -> Directory-1 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-1 Network Latencies L2Cache-1 -> L1Cache-0 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-1 -> L1Cache-1 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-1 -> L2Cache-0 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-1 -> Directory-0 net_lat: 9 L2Cache-1 -> Directory-1 net_lat: 9 Directory-0 Network Latencies Directory-0 -> L1Cache-0 net_lat: 9 Directory-0 -> L1Cache-1 net_lat: 9 Directory-0 -> L2Cache-0 net_lat: 9 Directory-0 -> L2Cache-1 net_lat: 9 Directory-0 -> Directory-1 net_lat: 9 Directory-1 Network Latencies Directory-1 -> L1Cache-0 net_lat: 9 Directory-1 -> L1Cache-1 net_lat: 9 Directory-1 -> L2Cache-0 net_lat: 9 Directory-1 -> L2Cache-1 net_lat: 9 Directory-1 -> Directory-0 net_lat: 9 While the network configuration for the 2 chips, 1 proc per chip and MOSI_SMP_bcast protocol are: Network Configuration --------------------- network: SIMPLE_NETWORK topology: HIERARCHICAL_SWITCH virtual_net_0: active, ordered virtual_net_1: active, unordered virtual_net_2: inactive virtual_net_3: inactive virtual_net_4: inactive --- Begin Topology Print --- Topology print ONLY indicates the _NETWORK_ latency between two machines It does NOT include the latency within the machines L1Cache-0 Network Latencies L1Cache-0 -> L1Cache-1 net_lat: 5 L1Cache-0 -> Directory-0 net_lat: 5 L1Cache-0 -> Directory-1 net_lat: 5 L1Cache-1 Network Latencies L1Cache-1 -> L1Cache-0 net_lat: 5 L1Cache-1 -> Directory-0 net_lat: 5 L1Cache-1 -> Directory-1 net_lat: 5 Directory-0 Network Latencies Directory-0 -> L1Cache-0 net_lat: 5 Directory-0 -> L1Cache-1 net_lat: 5 Directory-0 -> Directory-1 net_lat: 5 Directory-1 Network Latencies Directory-1 -> L1Cache-0 net_lat: 5 Directory-1 -> L1Cache-1 net_lat: 5 Directory-1 -> Directory-0 net_lat: 5 are these latencies allright for what I am trying to do, or should I configure them in a different way?? Thank you again!! 2009/6/15 David Bonavila <david.bonavila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|
[← Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread→] |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [Gems-users] failed assertion, Greg Byrd |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [Gems-users] Choosing which Ruby coherence protocol to use..., David Bonavila |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [Gems-users] Private L2 in a CMP..., Greg Byrd |
Next by Thread: | Re: [Gems-users] Private L2 in a CMP..., David Bonavila |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] |