> On 2011-07-01 15:02:18, Nilay Vaish wrote: > > Gabe, I took care of the things you had pointed out. Do you think we should > > commit this woithout taking care of the misc. registers?
This change itself is for the better since it gets copyRegs itself to work. The question is whether to bump the panic from there up to copyMiscRegs, and since I really don't think it will work as is the answer is probably yes. - Gabe ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/759/#review1377 ----------------------------------------------------------- On 2011-07-01 15:00:08, Nilay Vaish wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/759/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2011-07-01 15:00:08) > > > Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe Black, Steve Reinhardt, and > Nathan Binkert. > > > Summary > ------- > > x86: Implements copyRegs() function > The copyRegs() function for x86 is currently unimplemented. This patch > provides an implementation. > > Apart from this patch, I have another question. In the function > copyMiscRegs(), a comment appears that 'it has been implemented naively.' > Why the comment? What would an accurate implementation look like? > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/arch/x86/utility.cc 559ef3da5dac > > Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/759/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Nilay > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
