The maximum time is already on the wiki. I posted a "heads up" message on my change a few days before the maximum to give people that might have missed it a warning.
Gabe On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Steve Reinhardt via gem5-dev < [email protected]> wrote: > It's customary to send out a 'heads up' message along the lines of "the > following patches have been on reviewboard for N days with no comments, so > I'm going to commit them on <date> if no one speaks up in the meantime" > (where date is ideally at least 24, preferably 48 or more hours in the > future) just to give one more shot to people who may have missed the > initial review request one last warning. > > It's also nice to wait a certain minimum amount of time for reviews, e.g., > the process with http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2527 where it looks like you > got > a single 'ship it' from Nilay a few hours after posting and then committed > a few hours after that was pretty rushed---particularly since that whole > sequence occurred during normal sleeping hours in the Pacific time > zone---and didn't allow me to raise the issue about minimum python versions > that really needs some discussion (regardless of how it falls out). It > seems we should have some minimum time on review board as well as a maximum > time. > > If everyone agrees that these informal customs should be made official, I > can add them to the wiki. > > Steve > > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 6:20 AM, Gabe Black via gem5-dev < > [email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2505/#review5524 > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Per the review process documentation on the wiki, if nobody comments on > > this or asks me to wait after 10 days, I'm going to commit this as is. > > > > - Gabe Black > > > > > > On Nov. 17, 2014, 6:42 a.m., Gabe Black wrote: > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > > > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2505/ > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > (Updated Nov. 17, 2014, 6:42 a.m.) > > > > > > > > > Review request for Default. > > > > > > > > > Repository: gem5 > > > > > > > > > Description > > > ------- > > > > > > Changeset 10539:db6cb6e4303b > > > --------------------------- > > > ISA: Allow named constants as decode case values. > > > > > > The values in a "bitfield" or in an ExtMachInst structure member may > not > > be a > > > literal value, it might select from an arbitrary collection of options. > > Instead > > > of using the raw value of those constants in the decoder, it's easier > to > > tell > > > what's going on if they can be referred to as a symbolic constant/enum. > > > > > > To support that, the ISA description language is extended slightly so > > that in > > > addition to integer literals, the case value for decode blobs can also > > be a > > > string literal. It's up to the ISA author to ensure that the string > > evaluates > > > to a legal constant value when interpretted as C++. > > > > > > > > > Diffs > > > ----- > > > > > > src/arch/isa_parser.py 1a9e235cab09e37837819876d28fbd2914a47291 > > > > > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2505/diff/ > > > > > > > > > Testing > > > ------- > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Gabe Black > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > gem5-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > gem5-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
