----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1894/#review4387 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! LGTM. src/cpu/o3/fu_pool.cc <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1894/#comment4117> Is the bitwise and intended? It shouldn't matter though. - Andreas Sandberg On June 4, 2013, 10:46 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1894/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 4, 2013, 10:46 a.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 9744:03ce870a5145 > --------------------------- > cpu: Consider instructions waiting for FU completion in draining > > This patch changes the IEW drain check to include the FU pool as there > can be instructions that are "stored" in FU completion events and thus > not covered by the existing checks. With this patch, we simply include > a check to see if all the FUs are considered non-busy in the next > tick. > > Without this patch, the pc-switcheroo-full regression fails after > minor changes to the cache timing (aligning to clock edge). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/cpu/o3/fu_pool.hh ea26ba576891 > src/cpu/o3/fu_pool.cc ea26ba576891 > src/cpu/o3/iew_impl.hh ea26ba576891 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1894/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > All regressions pass > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Hansson > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
