#
13491:9783a9007eac |
|
05-Dec-2018 |
Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com> |
systemc: Update test output for longer lived processes.
In the systemc spec, process handles can be invalidated if they have no children and are terminated. The implementation is not required to do so however, and for the sake of simplicity gem5 currently does not. To quote:
"When the underlying process instance terminates, if the process instance has no surviving children, an implementation may choose to invalidate any associated process handles, but it is not obliged to do so."
Two tests have reference output which is affected by this (legal) difference in behavior. In one case, the test creates new processes which reuse the names of processes that have been terminated. Since gem5 doesn't invalidate the old processes, a standard mechanism is activated which renames the processes to something which is unique.
The other test has this same problem, and also prints the hierarchy of processes several times during the test. In that hierarchy, the terminated tests with no live children are still present, where in the old reference output they've been removed.
This change updates the reference output to match gem5's behavior.
Change-Id: I363448de10080bdce01a4df92f991c67b31a2401 Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/14919 Reviewed-by: Matthias Jung <jungma@eit.uni-kl.de> Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
|
#
13490:f300a864a212 |
|
04-Dec-2018 |
Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com> |
systemc: Update the ordering in the reference output for some tests.
There are a number of cases where systemc leaves the decision of what order things happen up to the kernel, and any ordering is legal and conformant with the spec as long as it's repeatable. The reference outputs reflect a particular choice of ordering which is implementation specific, and while considerable effort has been made to make the gem5 ordering match the Accellera ordering, at a certain point that's no longer practical or desirable.
This change manually updates the reference output for the tests that haven't been excluded for other reasons which have this sort of ordering problem. They have been individually examined, and as best as I can tell changing the output this way does not mask any underlying error.
One or two real problems were discovered in addition to the ordering issues, and those were fixed in earlier changes.
Change-Id: I915269998de3f33d5ab5d1fd754a830fd620184d Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/14918 Reviewed-by: Matthias Jung <jungma@eit.uni-kl.de> Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
|