On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 1:32 PM, nathan binkert <[email protected]> wrote:
> > and you don't think they look very similar? We'd have to figure out > where > > *res gets updated in O3 and InOrder, but other than that they look the > same > > to me. Now that I see how similar they are I'm surprised you aren't > anxious > > to eliminate the redundancy... > > They're definitely similar, and we could clearly factor out the > redundant parts, but I think we'd still be left with the template in > each CPU (unless we used the CRTP and created some sort of "postWrite" > function that defaults to nothing. I didn't think that this > particular redundancy was the issue. I thought the real issue was all > of the specializations in atomic.cc and timing.cc. > My guess (and assumption) is that the *res update in AtomicSimpleCPU is just due to a different code factorization, or could be moved into writeBytes(), to make all the templates identical. Then they could be factored out of the CPU models. If I'm wrong, then you're right, but I'm not convinced I'm wrong... Steve _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
