----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2548/#review5618 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/sim/syscall_emul.hh <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2548/#comment5021> How will the compiler choose between the two versions of unlinkFunc? I think we should either drop the default argument or drop the second version. src/sim/syscall_emul.hh <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2548/#comment5022> The parameters on the second line need to be aligned with ones in the first line. src/sim/syscall_emul.cc <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2548/#comment5023> Parameter needs to be aligned, - Nilay Vaish On Dec. 3, 2014, 7:10 p.m., mike upton wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2548/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Dec. 3, 2014, 7:10 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > arm: Add unlinkat syscall implementation > > added ARM aarch64 unlinkat syscall support, modeled on other <xxx>at syscalls. > This gets all of the cpu2006 int workloads passing in SE mode on aarch64. > > hmmer, omnetpp > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/arch/arm/linux/process.cc ad9146bb5598 > src/sim/syscall_emul.hh ad9146bb5598 > src/sim/syscall_emul.cc ad9146bb5598 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2548/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > build/ARM/tests/opt/quick/se > > SPEC CPU2006 integer apps, test and train input sizes > > > Thanks, > > mike upton > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
