How to benchmark code on FVP_MPS2_Cortex-M4 simulator?

Hi David,

FVPs and Fast Models (FM) sacrifice accuracy to get fast simulation speed so the result you see is expected. As I previously posted, users should not expect cycle accuracy from them. Please check what the models cannot in the link that I put in my previous post (see below in case you missed it).

https://developer.arm.com/documentation/100964/1116/Introduction-to-the-Fast-Models-Reference-Manual/Model-capabilities

--

Fast Models can:

• Accurately model instructions.
• Correctly execute architecturally-correct code.
• Model some unpredictable behavior.

Fast Models cannot:

• Validate the hardware.
• Model all unpredictable behavior.
• Model cycle counting.
• Model timing sensitive behavior.
• Model SMP instruction scheduling.
• Measure software performance.
• Model bus traffic.

--

You can increase accuracy with a smaller number of quantum (-Q) or minimum sync latency (-M) listed in Table 4 Timing and performance options of the FVP reference guide below, however, please note that even if you set them to the minimum number i.e. 1, you won't be able to see the expected result because this is how the model is implemented (they are not designed to produce accuracy but to run very fast) so again users should not expect cycle accuracy with FVP/FM.

developer.arm.com/.../FVP-command-line-options

Please note that smaller numbers to these parameters will make the model run slowly. Speed vs Accuracy is always exclusive.

Kind regards,
Toshi

Hi David,

FVPs and Fast Models (FM) sacrifice accuracy to get fast simulation speed so the result you see is expected. As I previously posted, users should not expect cycle accuracy from them. Please check what the models cannot in the link that I put in my previous post (see below in case you missed it).

https://developer.arm.com/documentation/100964/1116/Introduction-to-the-Fast-Models-Reference-Manual/Model-capabilities

--

Fast Models can:

• Accurately model instructions.
• Correctly execute architecturally-correct code.
• Model some unpredictable behavior.

Fast Models cannot:

• Validate the hardware.
• Model all unpredictable behavior.
• Model cycle counting.
• Model timing sensitive behavior.
• Model SMP instruction scheduling.
• Measure software performance.
• Model bus traffic.

--

You can increase accuracy with a smaller number of quantum (-Q) or minimum sync latency (-M) listed in Table 4 Timing and performance options of the FVP reference guide below, however, please note that even if you set them to the minimum number i.e. 1, you won't be able to see the expected result because this is how the model is implemented (they are not designed to produce accuracy but to run very fast) so again users should not expect cycle accuracy with FVP/FM.

developer.arm.com/.../FVP-command-line-options

Please note that smaller numbers to these parameters will make the model run slowly. Speed vs Accuracy is always exclusive.

Kind regards,
Toshi

Hi Toshi and Ronan

Thanks for your replies. It's pretty clear that FVP and fast models aren't suitable for my purposes. Does ARM offer a cycle accurate simulator for Cortex-M4? I realise it may be slow but we could tolerate that. If so, could you please tell me where I can obtain it?

Best regards

David

I've started a new thread 'Cycle accurate simulator for Cortex-M4?' as this one seems to have run its course.