-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2930/#review6757
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/sim/serialize.cc (lines 219 - 221)
<http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2930/#comment5846>

    I can we are doing this separate handling of the first element for vector 
and list as well.  Do we really need it?  Would we some problem in creating 
tokens?



src/sim/serialize.cc (line 472)
<http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2930/#comment5845>

    Please explain the Pixel disagreement more.


- Nilay Vaish


On June 30, 2015, 12:35 a.m., Curtis Dunham wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2930/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 30, 2015, 12:35 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Repository: gem5
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> The next patch, RB2931 "tag-based checkpoint versioning" uses sets of strings 
> to represent checkpoint versions.  This patch adds support for sets 
> containing strings in the checkpointing infrastructure.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/sim/serialize.hh 73d4798871a5560325b95ed2a4358982608b07e5 
>   src/sim/serialize.cc 73d4798871a5560325b95ed2a4358982608b07e5 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2930/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Curtis Dunham
> 
>

_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to