Re: [Valgrind-users] Concerning cg_annotation not working

[Felipe A. <fel...@gm...>]

Thanks once again!

Now, in the end of the test, I have to analize all the data collected and I
found another barrier for succeeding in such task.

I couldn't figure out how the miss rates work, because if there were 115773
references on I, no way 611 is 0.52%, it should  be 1.89%, same goes for all
the others miss rates. Am I missing something?
==6464== I   refs:      115,773
==6464== I1  misses:        611
==6464== L2i misses:        609
==6464== I1  miss rate:    0.52%          *-> this should be 1,89%, isn't
it? x=115773/(611*100)*
==6464== L2i miss rate:    0.52%
==6464==
==6464== D   refs:       57,878  (41,851 rd   + 16,027 wr)
==6464== D1  misses:      1,063  (   899 rd   +    164 wr)
==6464== L2d misses:        977  (   821 rd   +    156 wr)
==6464== D1  miss rate:     1.8% (   2.1%     +    1.0%  )
==6464== L2d miss rate:     1.6% (   1.9%     +    0.9%  )
==6464==
==6464== L2 refs:         1,674  ( 1,510 rd   +    164 wr)
==6464== L2 misses:       1,586  ( 1,430 rd   +    156 wr)
==6464== L2 miss rate:      0.9% (   0.9%     +    0.9%  )

Kind regards

2008/6/11 Nicholas Nethercote <nj...@cs...>:

> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, Felipe Athayde wrote:
>
>  Would you mind to answer me one last question? How do I choose which kind
>> of
>> mapping (Direct Mapped Cache, Fully Associative Cache, N-Way Set
>> Associative
>> Cache) is going to be used? Because I have to make a comparison between of
>> al them.
>>
>
> The 2nd value in the --I1/--D1/--L2 options is the associativity.  For
> fully associative, just set it high enough according to the size and
> line-size of your cache.
>
> Nick
>



-- 
Felipe