I looked at this a long time ago and I concluded it would add more complexity to the tester than I wanted to add. Since then, we have built additional testers that don't understand retries. I would strongly prefer we keep it and I'm not sure why you want to remove it. Can we just move this condition to QueuedPort?
In general, my preference is to have fewer retries between the core models and Ruby. We should only be doing retries when we have structural hazards and the testers should not be running in an environment where structures are limited. The testers are used to stress the logic and work best when we allow big burst of requests. Brad -----Original Message----- From: Nilay Vaish [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 4:56 PM To: Beckmann, Brad Cc: Default Subject: Re: Review Request 2549: ruby: ruby port: do not check for blocked ports On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, Brad Beckmann wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2549/#review5657 > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2549/#comment5048> > > Why are you removing these lines? Is the tester now aware when the > port is blocked and does it handle retries correctly? I would prefer > if it did not. We want the tester to be as aggressive as possible. I am aware that the tester needs to change. Brad, is there any problem if the tester just tries to send packets even when the port is blocked? At most it would fail. -- Nilay _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
