Is it possible to run the simulation for a certain amount of ticks, and then read the value of selected statistics from the Python config script?
Edit: a patch has been submitted at: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/33176
As of 3ca404da175a66e0b958165ad75eb5f54cb5e772 it does not seem possible, but it is likely easy to implement.
We already have a loop that goes over all stats in the Python under src/python/m5/stats/__init__.py, so there are python stat objects fully exposed and iterated, but the actual stat value appears not exposed to them, only the stat name:
def _dump_to_visitor(visitor, root=None):
# Legacy stats
if root is None:
for stat in stats_list:
stat.visit(visitor)
# New stats
def dump_group(group):
for stat in group.getStats():
stat.visit(visitor)
The visit method then leads the value to be written out to the stat file, but the Python does not do it.
However, visit is already a pybind11 Python C++ extension defined at src/python/pybind11/stats.cc:
py::class_<Stats::Info, std::unique_ptr<Stats::Info, py::nodelete>>(
m, "Info")
.def("visit", &Stats::Info::visit)
;
so you would likely need to expose the value there.
One annoyance is that each stat type that derives from Stats::Info has a different data representation, e.g. scalars return a double:
class ScalarInfo : public Info
{
public:
virtual Counter value() const = 0;
but vectors an std::vector:
class VectorInfo : public Info
{
public:
virtual const VCounter &value() const = 0;
and so there is no base value() method due to the different return types, you'd juts need to expose one per base class.
TODO I couldn't see the value() method on the Python still, likely because they were still objects of the base class, needs more investigating.
You can use variation of the gem5-stat-summarizer. gem5-stat-summarizer is used to extract selected gem5 statistics to a csv file when you have multiple stats.txt files
Related
Let's say I want to connect to two package repositories, make a query for a package name, combine the result from the repos and process it (filter, unique, prioritize,...), What is a good way to do that?
What I though about is creating Array of two Cro::HTTP::Client objects (with base-uri specific to each repo), and when I need to make HTTP request I call #a>>.get, then process the result from the repos together.
I have attached a snippet of what I'm trying to do. But I would like to see if there is a better way to do that. or if the approach mention in the following link is suitable for this use case! https://perl6advent.wordpress.com/2013/12/08/day-08-array-based-objects/
use Cro::HTTP::Client;
class Repo {
has $.name;
has Cro::HTTP::Client $!client;
has Cro::Uri $.uri;
has Bool $.disable = False;
submethod TWEAK () {
$!client = Cro::HTTP::Client.new(base-uri => $!uri, :json);
}
method get (:$package) {
my $path = <x86_64?>;
my $resp = await $!client.get($path ~ $package);
my $json = await $resp.body;
return $json;
}
}
class AllRepos {
has Repo #.repo;
method get (:$package) {
# check if some repos are disabled
my #candidate = #!repo>>.get(:$package).unique(:with(&[eqv])).flat;
# do furthre processign of the data then return it;
return #candidate;
}
}
my $repo1 = Repo.new: name => 'repo1', uri => Cro::Uri.new(:uri<http://localhost:80>);
my $repo2 = Repo.new: name => 'repo2', uri => Cro::Uri.new(:uri<http://localhost:77>);
my #repo = $repo1, $repo2;
my $repos = AllRepos.new: :#repo;
#my #packages = $repos.get: package => 'rakudo';
Let's say I want to connect to two package repositories, make a query for a package name, combine the result from the repos and process it (filter, unique, prioritize,...), What is a good way to do that?
The code you showed looks like one good way in principle but not, currently, in practice.
The hyperoperators such as >>:
Distribute an operation (in your case, connect and make a query) ...
... to the leaves of one or two input composite data structures (in your case the elements of one array #!repo) ...
... with logically parallel semantics (by using a hyperoperator you are declaring that you are taking responsibility for thinking that the parallel invocations of the operation will not interfere with each other, which sounds reasonable for connecting and querying) ...
... and then return a resulting composite data structure with the same shape as the original structure if the hyperoperator is a unary operator (which applies in your case, because you applied >>, which is an unary operator which takes a single argument on its left, so the result of the >>.get is just a new array, just like the input #!repo) or whose shape is the hyper'd combination of the shapes of the pair of structures if the hyperoperator is a binary operator, such as >>op<< ...
... which can then be further processed (in your case it is, with .unique, which will produce a resulting Seq) ...
... whose elements you then assign back into another array (#candidate).
So your choice is a decent fit in principle, but the commitment to parallelism is only semantic and right now the Rakudo compiler never takes advantage of it, so it will actually run your code sequentially, which presumably isn't a good fit in practice.
Instead I suggest you consider:
Using map to distribute an operation over multiple elements (in a shallow manner; map doesn't recursively descend into a deep structure like the hyperoperators, deepmap etc., but that's OK for your use case) ...
... in combination with the race method which parallelizes the method it proceeds.
So you might write:
my #candidate =
#!repo.hyper.map(*.get: :$package).unique(:with(&[eqv])).flat;
Alternatively, check out task 94 in Using Perl 6.
if the approach mention in the following link is suitable for this use case! https://perl6advent.wordpress.com/2013/12/08/day-08-array-based-objects/
I don't think so. That's about constructing a general purpose container that's like an array but with some differences to the built in Array that are worth baking into a new type.
I can just about imagine such things that are vaguely related to your use case -- eg an array type that automatically hyper distributes method calls invoked on it, if they're defined on Any or Mu (rather than Array or List), i.e. does what I described above but with the code #!repo.get... instead of hyper #!repo.map: *.get .... But would it be worth it (assuming it would work -- I haven't thought about it beyond inventing the idea for this answer)? I doubt it.
More generally...
It seems like what you are looking for is cookbook like material. Perhaps a question posted at the reddit sub /r/perl6 is in order?
I want to control read access to an Itcl public variable. I can do this for write access using something such as:
package require Itcl
itcl::class base_model_lib {
public variable filename ""
}
itcl::configbody base_model_lib::filename {
puts "in filename write"
dict set d_model filename $filename
}
The configbody defines what happens when config is called: $obj configure -filename foo.txt. But how do I control what happens during the read? Imagine that I want to do more than just look up a value during the read.
I would like to stay using the standard Itcl pattern of using cget/configure to expose these to the user.
So that is my question. However, let me describe what I really want to do and you tell me if I should do something completely different :)
I like python classes. I like that I can create a variable and read/write to it from outside the instance. Later, when I want to get fancy, I'll create methods (using #property and #property.setter) to customize the read/write without the user seeing an API change. I'm trying to do the same thing here.
My sample code also suggests something else I want to do. Actually, the filename is stored internally in a dictionary. i don't want to expose that entire dictionary to the user, but I do want them to be able to change values inside that dict. So, really 'filename' is just a stub. I don't want a public variable called that. I instead want to use cget and configure to read and write a "thing", which I may chose to make a simple public variable or may wish to define a procedure for looking it up.
PS: I'm sure I could create a method which took either one or two arguments. If one, its a read and two its a write. I assumed that wasn't the way to go as I don't think you could use the cget/configure method.
All Itcl variables are mapped to Tcl variables in a namespace whose name is difficult to guess. This means that you can get a callback whenever you read a variable (it happens immediately before the variable is actually read) via Tcl's standard tracing mechanism; all you need to do is to create the trace in the constructor. This requires the use of itcl::scope and is best done with itcl::code $this so that we can make the callback be a private method:
package require Itcl
itcl::class base_model_lib {
public variable filename ""
constructor {} {
trace add variable [itcl::scope filename] read [itcl::code $this readcallback]
}
private method readcallback {args} { # You can ignore the arguments here
puts "about to read the -filename"
set filename "abc.[expr rand()]"
}
}
All itcl::configbody does is effectively the equivalent for variable write traces, which are a bit more common, though we'd usually prefer you to set the trace directly these days as that's a more general mechanism. Demonstrating after running the above script:
% base_model_lib foo
foo
% foo configure
about to read the -filename
{-filename {} abc.0.8870089169996832}
% foo configure -filename
about to read the -filename
-filename {} abc.0.9588680136757288
% foo cget -filename
about to read the -filename
abc.0.694705847974264
As you can see, we're controlling exactly what is read via the standard mechanism (in this case, some randomly varying gibberish, but you can do better than that).
I am developing server actions in Odoo 7 of the "Python code" type. How can I know the list of disponible methods that I can call? Where is this documentation?
Thanks!
Server actions are evaluated through the safe_eval method in openerp/tools/safe_eval.py. The __builtins__ dict contains the allowed methods. Two things should be noted:
__import__ is not your regular import; it is a redefinition that allows you to import _strptime and time only.
globals is redefined to return locals instead, to keep things neatly sandboxed.
The list of allowed methods, types, etc... is as follows:
__import__
True
False
None
str
unicode
globals
locals
bool
int
float
long
enumerate
dict
list
tuple
map
abs
min
max
sum
reduce
filter
round
len
repr
set
all
any
ord
chr
cmp
divmod
isinstance
range
xrange
zip
Exception
As far as I know, this is not documented anywhere.
Apart from these, you also have access to the following, as noted in the comments on the empty Python Code when you create a server action:
self: ORM model of the record on which the action is triggered
object: Record on which the action is triggered if there is one, otherwise None
pool: ORM model pool (i.e. self.pool)
cr: database cursor
uid: current user id
context: current context
time: Python time module
workflow: Workflow engine
And the undocumented (you need to check the source of openerp/addons/base/ir/ir_actions.py):
datetime: Python datetime module
dateutil: Python dateutil module
user: browse record of current user (contrast with uid, which is just his user id)
Warning: openerp.exceptions.Warning
I've inherited a piece of custom test equipment with a control library built in a COM object, and I'm trying to connect it to our Tcl test script library. I can connect to the DLL using TCOM, and do some simple control operations with single int parameters. However, certain features are controlled by passing in a C/C++ struct that contains the control blocks, and attempting to use them in TCOM is giving me an error 0x80020005 {Type mismatch.}. The struct is defined in the .idl file, so it's available to TCOM to use.
The simplest example is a particular call as follows:
C++ .idl file:
struct SourceScaleRange
{
float MinVoltage;
float MaxVoltage;
};
interface IAnalogIn : IDispatch{
...
[id(4), helpstring("method GetAdcScaleRange")] HRESULT GetAdcScaleRange(
[out] struct SourceScaleRange *scaleRange);
...
}
Tcl wrapper:
::tcom::import [file join $::libDir "PulseMeas.tlb"] ::char
set ::characterizer(AnalogIn) [::char::AnalogIn]
set scaleRange ""
set response [$::characterizer(AnalogIn) GetAdcScaleRange scaleRange]
Resulting error:
0x80020005 {Type mismatch.}
while executing
"$::characterizer(AnalogIn) GetAdcScaleRange scaleRange"
(procedure "charGetAdcScaleRange" line 4)
When I dump TCOM's methods, it knows of the name of the struct, at least, but it seems to have dropped the struct keyword. Some introspection code
set ifhandle [::tcom::info interface $::characterizer(AnalogIn)]
puts "methods: [$ifhandle methods]"
returns
methods: ... {4 VOID GetAdcScaleRange {{out {SourceScaleRange *} scaleRange}}} ...
I don't know if this is meaningful or not.
At this point, I'd be happy to get any ideas on where to look next. Is this a known TCOM limitation (undocumented, but known)? Is there a way to pre-process the parameter into an appropriate format using tcom? Do I need to force it into a correctly sized block of memory via binary format by manual construction? Do I need to take the DLL back to the original developer and have him pull out all the struct parameters? (Not likely to happen, in this reality.) Any input is good input.
i've assumed that dumping a .bc file from a module was a trivial operation, but now,
first time i have to actually do it from code, for the life of me i
can't find one missing step in the process:
static void WriteModule ( const Module * M, BitstreamWriter & Stream )
http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/BitcodeWriter_8cpp.html#a828cec7a8fed9d232556420efef7ae89
to write that module, first i need a BistreamWriter
BitstreamWriter::BitstreamWriter (SmallVectorImpl< char > &O)
http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/classllvm_1_1BitstreamWriter.html
and for a BitstreamWriter i need a SmallVectorImpl. But, what next?
Should i write the content of the SmallVectorImpl byte by byte on a
file handler myself? is there a llvm api for this? do i need something
else?
The WriteModule function is static within lib/Bitcode/Writer/BitcodeWriter.cpp, which means it's not there for outside consumption (you can't even access it).
The same file has another function, however, called WriteBitcodeToFile, with this interface:
/// WriteBitcodeToFile - Write the specified module to the specified output
/// stream.
void llvm::WriteBitcodeToFile(const Module *M, raw_ostream &Out);
I can't imagine a more convenient interface. The header file declaring it is ./include/llvm/Bitcode/ReaderWriter.h, by the way.
I use following code :
std::error_code EC;
llvm::raw_fd_ostream OS("module", EC, llvm::sys::fs::F_None);
WriteBitcodeToFile(pBiFModule, OS);
OS.flush();
and then disassemble using llvm-dis.