> 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? > > Gabe Black wrote: > 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.
Well, that would not solve the actual problem. Suppose I were to implement it, where should I start from? - Nilay ----------------------------------------------------------- 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
