-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1861/#review4374
-----------------------------------------------------------


A few questions, but overall it looks good.


src/cpu/kvm/base.cc
<http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1861/#comment4107>

    Why here and not when it is used?



src/cpu/kvm/base.cc
<http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1861/#comment4106>

    What happens to the packet on the IprRead/Write? The reason I'm asking is 
that the packet in question will go out of scope here and I'm simply not sure 
if it is still in use or not.



src/mem/request.hh
<http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1861/#comment4105>

    Are there any locations in the code base where we assume that a virtual 
address is present? If so, could you point out where in the comment above?


- Andreas Hansson


On May 2, 2013, 7:02 a.m., Andreas Sandberg wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1861/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 2, 2013, 7:02 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Changeset 9692:651d765c1975
> ---------------------------
> kvm: Use the address finalization code in the TLB
> 
> Reuse the address finalization code in the TLB instead of replicating
> it when handling MMIO. This patch also adds support for injecting
> memory mapped IPR requests into the memory system.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/cpu/kvm/base.cc 00dca8a9b560 
>   src/mem/request.hh 00dca8a9b560 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1861/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Quick regressions pass (with the exception of 02.insttest and 
> 40.m5threads-test-atomic where I can't find the binaries) for all supported 
> architectures. Boots Linux in KVM mode on x86 when applied together with 
> #1860 (x86 requires APIC remapping magic from the TLB). Shouldn't affect ARM 
> since finalizePhysical() is a no-op.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andreas Sandberg
> 
>

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

Reply via email to