Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

update some code in /apps/gemini/src/platform #718

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 11, 2024

Conversation

xiuhu17
Copy link
Contributor

@xiuhu17 xiuhu17 commented Oct 10, 2024

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 10, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.07%. Comparing base (3d02a16) to head (54004c2).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #718   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.07%   88.07%           
=======================================
  Files          92       92           
  Lines       21303    21303           
=======================================
  Hits        18763    18763           
  Misses       2540     2540           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@yamaguchi1024
Copy link
Member

Hi @xiuhu17 ! Thanks for the PR. Could you explain why you had to change the Gemmini malloc code? Was it incorrect in some cases? Could you provide a reproducer?

@xiuhu17
Copy link
Contributor Author

xiuhu17 commented Oct 13, 2024

Hi @yamaguchi1024 , the reason I change it because the original code looks like:

  uint32_t loc = 0;
  if (i > 0) {
    loc = ACC_BLOCKS[i - 1].loc + ACC_BLOCKS[i - 1].size;
  }
  ACC_BLOCKS[i].size = size;
  ACC_BLOCKS[i].loc = 0;

The uint32_t loc seems to be useless, and the return value will always be 0x80000000.

@yamaguchi1024
Copy link
Member

Sorry for dropping the ball on this! The Gemmini malloc files are a bit stale honestly, and I don't think there's any test case that executes this either. I'm really curious how you found this bug. Were you trying to repurpose this code for some other memory allocation?

@xiuhu17
Copy link
Contributor Author

xiuhu17 commented Nov 11, 2024

Sorry for dropping the ball on this! The Gemmini malloc files are a bit stale honestly, and I don't think there's any test case that executes this either. I'm really curious how you found this bug. Were you trying to repurpose this code for some other memory allocation?

Yeh, I previously was trying to figure out the allocation logic used by EXO, I read the code and found that issue. :)

@yamaguchi1024
Copy link
Member

@xiuhu17 great, thanks for the contribution!

@yamaguchi1024 yamaguchi1024 enabled auto-merge (squash) November 11, 2024 21:40
@yamaguchi1024 yamaguchi1024 merged commit 544a932 into exo-lang:main Nov 11, 2024
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants