-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1121/#review2488
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Seems fine to me.

- Nilay Vaish


On April 4, 2012, 3:44 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1121/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 4, 2012, 3:44 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> MEM: Remove the Broadcast destination from the packet
> 
> This patch simplifies the packet by removing the broadcast flag and
> instead more firmly relying on (and enforcing) the semantics of
> transactions in the classic memory system, i.e. request packets are
> routed from a master to a slave based on the address, and when they
> are created they have neither a valid source, nor destination. On
> their way to the slave, the request packet is updated with a source
> field for all modules that multiplex packets from multiple master
> (e.g. a bus). When a request packet is turned into a response packet
> (at the final slave), it moves the potentially populated source field
> to the destination field, and the response packet is routed through
> any multiplexing components back to the master based on the
> destination field.
> 
> Modules that connect multiplexing components, such as caches and
> bridges store any existing source and destination field in the sender
> state as a stack (just as before).
> 
> The packet constructor is simplified in that there is no longer a need
> to pass the Packet::Broadcast as the destination (this was always the
> case for the classic memory system). In the case of Ruby, rather than
> using the parameter to the constructor we now rely on setDest, as
> there is already another three-argument constructor in the packet
> class.
> 
> In many places where the packet information was printed as part of
> DPRINTFs, request packets would be printed with a numeric "dest" that
> would always be -1 (Broadcast) and that field is now removed from the
> printing.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/arch/arm/table_walker.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/arch/x86/intmessage.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/arch/x86/pagetable_walker.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/checker/cpu.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/checker/cpu_impl.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/inorder/resources/cache_unit.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/inorder/resources/cache_unit.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/o3/fetch_impl.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/o3/lsq_unit.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/o3/lsq_unit_impl.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/ozone/front_end_impl.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/ozone/lw_lsq.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/ozone/lw_lsq_impl.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/simple/atomic.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/simple/timing.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/testers/directedtest/InvalidateGenerator.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/testers/directedtest/SeriesRequestGenerator.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/testers/memtest/memtest.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/testers/networktest/networktest.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/cpu/testers/rubytest/Check.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/dev/io_device.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/bridge.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/bridge.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/bus.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/cache/cache_impl.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/cache/prefetch/base.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/cache/tags/iic.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/packet.hh 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/port.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/port_proxy.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/ruby/recorder/CacheRecorder.cc 570b44fe6e04 
>   src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc 570b44fe6e04 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1121/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> util/regress all passing (disregarding t1000 and eio)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andreas Hansson
> 
>

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

Reply via email to