-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/788/#review1432
-----------------------------------------------------------


I ran the X86 regressions with these patches and my uncommitted X86_FS patches, 
and other than some expected stat differences everything seems ok. I'm not 
familiar with this particular code so I can't comment on whether it's being 
changed properly, but I don't see any really obvious problems.

- Gabe


On 2011-07-13 09:02:29, Ali Saidi wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/788/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2011-07-13 09:02:29)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe Black, Steve Reinhardt, and 
> Nathan Binkert.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> O3: Squash the violator and younger instructions instead not all insts.
> 
> Change the way instructions are squashed on memory ordering violations
> to squash the violator and younger instructions, not all instructions
> that are younger than the instruction they violated (no reason to throw
> away valid work).
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/cpu/o3/iew_impl.hh 82ff928182c5 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/788/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ali
> 
>

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

Reply via email to