Re: [Valgrind-users] Concerning cg_annotation not working

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

Oh well, here I am again, again with the math issue:
==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%  )

l2 refs 1674
l2 misses 1586, how come it says 0,9% miss rate?

2008/6/12 Felipe Athayde <fel...@gm...>:

> Oops, math mistake :P
>
> I just finished my work. Thank you to both of you who helped me.
>
> Regards~
>
> 2008/6/12 Hien Le <Hi...@me...>:
>
> There were 115773 instruction refs total, of which 611 references were I1
>> misses.  661 / 115773 = 0.52%.
>>
>>
>>  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
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Felipe
>
>
>
> --
> Felipe




-- 
Felipe