> On June 13, 2013, 7:53 a.m., Steve Reinhardt wrote:
> > Are we relying on pkt->bus{First,Last}WordDelay to be a multiple of the 
> > cache clock period?  Of course that would normally be the case if the cache 
> > and bus are on the same clock, and I'm sure there are many things we get 
> > wrong if they're not, but it seems to be it would be safer to have those 
> > terms inside the call to clockEdge() as well.  Unless there's a good reason 
> > that they're not... if so, please enlighten me.
> 
> Andreas Hansson wrote:
>     Very valid concerns indeed. The main reason they are not included is that 
> they are expressed in Ticks rather than cycles. We could definitely turn them 
> into cycles and them align them, but for now I'd rather keep it as is.

That sounds like a good reason for keeping it like it is... thanks for the 
explanation!


- Steve


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1895/#review4426
-----------------------------------------------------------


On June 4, 2013, 10:47 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1895/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 4, 2013, 10:47 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Changeset 9745:58e6081c3e49
> ---------------------------
> mem: Align cache timing to clock edges
> 
> This patch changes the cache timing calculations such that the results
> are aligned to clock edges.
> 
> Plenty stats change as a results of this patch.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/mem/cache/cache_impl.hh ea26ba576891 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1895/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> All regressions pass after stats updates
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andreas Hansson
> 
>

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

Reply via email to