-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/693/#review4513
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


It seems like the old code was being very cautious and limiting the number of 
loads that could be sent to the lsq to the current free - the number 
dispatched. This change seems to actually check how many memory references were 
dispatched. It makes sense. Anyone have any thoughts about committing it?

- Ali Saidi


On May 13, 2011, 2:30 p.m., Yasuko Watanabe wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/693/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 13, 2011, 2:30 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe Black, Nathan Binkert, and Steve 
> Reinhardt.
> 
> 
> Repository: gem5
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> O3: Fixed an LSQ full check condition at rename.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/cpu/o3/rename.hh 54a65799e4c1 
>   src/cpu/o3/rename_impl.hh 54a65799e4c1 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/693/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Yasuko Watanabe
> 
>

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

Reply via email to