It does mean that there are incompatible versions of FireMarshal and Chipyard if they get out of sync (part of why marshal is a submodule). Was Rocketchip updated independently of FireMarshal? You might double check that your version lines up with the official Chipyard release's version.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chipyard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chipyard+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chipyard/7a80325c-ef15-4fec-89e4-6042f3f911a1n%40googlegroups.com.
On Jan 14, 2021, at 18:36, nat...@berkeley.edu <nat...@berkeley.edu> wrote:
Hello Varun
If you re-build the default configs (the same ones used for the pre-built configs), does fedora still run on them?
If that’s the case, that would likely indicate that there is a bug in your custom implementation. This can be for a variety of reasons: differences in periphery / device drivers / device tree, changes to the functionality of the core, etc.
If the fedora image runs on the default configs after they have been re-built from scratch (i.e., new agfis that you re-built using your own manager instance), that is a strong hint that the problem is not with a firemarshal version mismatch, but rather with the modified implementation.
Alon
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chipyard/38EEF99F-7AC9-4A7C-87B6-A74E96EFDC15%40g.harvard.edu.
If that’s the case, that would likely indicate that there is a bug in your custom implementation. This can be for a variety of reasons: differences in periphery / device drivers / device tree, changes to the functionality of the core, etc.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chipyard/0ac301d70645%24fd96d670%24f8c48350%24%40berkeley.edu.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chipyard/0c54b464-f153-4e68-a055-1c69f9fb0524n%40googlegroups.com.
Hi Varun
If you believe the problem is with the medium boom implementation, please open an issue in the boom github repo: https://github.com/riscv-boom/riscv-boom/issues
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chipyard/F05CF651-B295-47F5-8F6F-407A3BD34D60%40g.harvard.edu.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chipyard/0f0a01d708e8%24d9a91250%248cfb36f0%24%40berkeley.edu.