> On Aug. 6, 2012, 6:26 p.m., Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > src/dev/dma_device.hh, line 76 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1316/diff/3/?file=28322#file28322line76> > > > > Why the switch from list to deque? Not that I have much preference, > > just wondering why it matters enough to change.
Probably not measurable. It is merely to make it clear that we only push at the back and pop the front. There is never insertion in the middle. - Andreas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1316/#review3213 ----------------------------------------------------------- On July 28, 2012, 10:24 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1316/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 28, 2012, 10:24 a.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 9146:a02007211735 > --------------------------- > DMA: Refactor the DMA device and align timing and atomic > > This patch does a bunch of house-keeping updates on the DMA, including > indentation, and formatting, but most importantly breaks out the > response handling such that it can be shared between the atomic and > timing modes. It also removes a potential bug caused by the atomic > handling of responses only deleting the allocated request (pkt->req) > once the DMA action completes instead of doing so for every packet. > > Before this patch, the handling of responses was near identical for > atomic and timing, but the code was simply duplicated. With this > patch, the handleResp method deals with the responses in both cases. > > There are further updates to make after removing the NACKs, but that > will be part of a separate follow-up patch. This patch does not change > the behaviour of any regression. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/dev/dma_device.hh 64d4c9d8a384 > src/dev/dma_device.cc 64d4c9d8a384 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1316/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
