I did sent out an email about the approach a week back, that is last
Saturday.
--
Nilay
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012, Gabriel Michael Black wrote:
I'd like to make a meta-comment here. It's good to communicate what you're
doing so you don't get a long ways in and find out you went the wrong way,
but at the same time it's important to know that what you've got is actually
going to work before you go to get it checked in. With what I'm expecting
will be a significant change like this, I think it's best to have some good
discussion about how your design will work, then to implement it and get it
working, and then to get it checked in in reviewable pieces. If you get all
the way to something that works, you'll be able to see what changes you made
that were ultimately unnecessary, what things you overlooked that forced
something to be done a different way, etc. What you've got here I don't think
will work and does things it doesn't need to do. It's in roughly the right
direction though, so if you took it the rest of the way I think those
problems would get fixed.
Gabe
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
