Emulating sleep system call in Gem5 SE mode
Hi all,
The Gem5 v20 does not emulate sleep system calls in SE mode.
A few applications in my experiment use sleep call.
Emulating the system call requires modification to "syscall_emul.cc" file
(implementation of system call) and "syscall_tbl64.cc" ( update the mapping
for emulated function).
Is it a good choice to emulate the system call or switch to FS mode for
these applications?
Regards,
Vipin
Hey Vipin,
I'm stating the obvious here but you really only have two choices here:
- Implement the Syscall/Syscalls you need (if you do this, please share
the implemented syscalls with the community:
https://www.gem5.org/contributing ). - Use Full-System (FS) mode instead of Syscall Emulation (SE) mode.
Not knowing exactly what you're wanting to do here, I can't tell you which
would be better for your work. FS-mode will be more accurate regardless as
to what you're trying to emulate but it's considerably slower than SE mode.
SE mode is faster but it's only useful when you don't need to emulate OS
level behavior (for example, generating random traffic to test a simulated
memory system).
Kind regards,
Bobby
Dr. Bobby R. Bruce
Room 3050,
Kemper Hall, UC Davis
Davis,
CA, 95616
web: https://www.bobbybruce.net
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 12:15 AM VIPIN PATEL patelvipin11@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
The Gem5 v20 does not emulate sleep system calls in SE mode.
A few applications in my experiment use sleep call.
Emulating the system call requires modification to "syscall_emul.cc" file
(implementation of system call) and "syscall_tbl64.cc" ( update the mapping
for emulated function).
Is it a good choice to emulate the system call or switch to FS mode for
these applications?
Regards,
Vipin
gem5-users mailing list -- gem5-users@gem5.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gem5-users-leave@gem5.org
Hi Bobby,
I am using the Synchrobench benchmark suite (
https://github.com/gramoli/synchrobench).
The application in the benchmark uses nanosleep call (
https://github.com/gramoli/synchrobench/blob/f25adff34dde3053be4874a6a9abad049a76ec70/c-cpp/src/hashtables/lockbased-ht/test.c#L526
).
Regards,
Vipin
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 3:33 AM Bobby Bruce bbruce@ucdavis.edu wrote:
Hey Vipin,
I'm stating the obvious here but you really only have two choices here:
- Implement the Syscall/Syscalls you need (if you do this, please share
the implemented syscalls with the community:
https://www.gem5.org/contributing ). - Use Full-System (FS) mode instead of Syscall Emulation (SE) mode.
Not knowing exactly what you're wanting to do here, I can't tell you which
would be better for your work. FS-mode will be more accurate regardless as
to what you're trying to emulate but it's considerably slower than SE mode.
SE mode is faster but it's only useful when you don't need to emulate OS
level behavior (for example, generating random traffic to test a simulated
memory system).
Kind regards,
Bobby
Dr. Bobby R. Bruce
Room 3050,
Kemper Hall, UC Davis
Davis,
CA, 95616
web: https://www.bobbybruce.net
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 12:15 AM VIPIN PATEL patelvipin11@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all,
The Gem5 v20 does not emulate sleep system calls in SE mode.
A few applications in my experiment use sleep call.
Emulating the system call requires modification to "syscall_emul.cc"
file (implementation of system call) and "syscall_tbl64.cc" ( update the
mapping for emulated function).
Is it a good choice to emulate the system call or switch to FS mode for
these applications?
Regards,
Vipin
gem5-users mailing list -- gem5-users@gem5.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gem5-users-leave@gem5.org
gem5-users mailing list -- gem5-users@gem5.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gem5-users-leave@gem5.org
I'm not sure what research you're trying to undertake so I can't make the
decision for you. Though, when in doubt, use FS mode. SE mode simulates
less stuff less accurately.
--
Dr. Bobby R. Bruce
Room 3050,
Kemper Hall, UC Davis
Davis,
CA, 95616
web: https://www.bobbybruce.net
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 12:11 AM VIPIN PATEL patelvipin11@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Bobby,
I am using the Synchrobench benchmark suite (
https://github.com/gramoli/synchrobench).
The application in the benchmark uses nanosleep call (
https://github.com/gramoli/synchrobench/blob/f25adff34dde3053be4874a6a9abad049a76ec70/c-cpp/src/hashtables/lockbased-ht/test.c#L526
).
Regards,
Vipin
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 3:33 AM Bobby Bruce bbruce@ucdavis.edu wrote:
Hey Vipin,
I'm stating the obvious here but you really only have two choices here:
- Implement the Syscall/Syscalls you need (if you do this, please share
the implemented syscalls with the community:
https://www.gem5.org/contributing ). - Use Full-System (FS) mode instead of Syscall Emulation (SE) mode.
Not knowing exactly what you're wanting to do here, I can't tell you
which would be better for your work. FS-mode will be more accurate
regardless as to what you're trying to emulate but it's considerably slower
than SE mode. SE mode is faster but it's only useful when you don't need to
emulate OS level behavior (for example, generating random traffic to test a
simulated memory system).
Kind regards,
Bobby
Dr. Bobby R. Bruce
Room 3050,
Kemper Hall, UC Davis
Davis,
CA, 95616
web: https://www.bobbybruce.net
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 12:15 AM VIPIN PATEL patelvipin11@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all,
The Gem5 v20 does not emulate sleep system calls in SE mode.
A few applications in my experiment use sleep call.
Emulating the system call requires modification to "syscall_emul.cc"
file (implementation of system call) and "syscall_tbl64.cc" ( update the
mapping for emulated function).
Is it a good choice to emulate the system call or switch to FS mode for
these applications?
Regards,
Vipin
gem5-users mailing list -- gem5-users@gem5.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gem5-users-leave@gem5.org
gem5-users mailing list -- gem5-users@gem5.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gem5-users-leave@gem5.org
gem5-users mailing list -- gem5-users@gem5.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gem5-users-leave@gem5.org