> On Feb. 6, 2015, 12:16 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > Ship It! > > Andreas Hansson wrote: > Here it would be good to test with the new memtest: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2612/ > > Note that the caches suffer from message deadlock at the moment, and the > test dies very quickly. I shall post a patch that fixes the message deadlock > in the next few days. > >
I think I can prove that this patch does not affect program semantics. Combined with passing the current regressions, I have a lot of confidence that this patch doesn't break anything. It's really just code cleanup. - Steve ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2637/#review5848 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 5, 2015, 4:38 p.m., Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2637/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 5, 2015, 4:38 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 10684:ded42ff6f410 > --------------------------- > mem: clean up write buffer check in Cache::handleSnoop() > > The 'if (writebacks.size)' check was redundant, because > writeBuffer.findMatches() would return false if the > writebacks list was empty. > > Also renamed 'mshr' to 'wb_entry' in this context since > we are pointing at a writebuffer entry and not an MSHR > (even though it's the same C++ class). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/cache/cache_impl.hh 3d17366c0423a59478ae63d40c8feeea34df218a > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2637/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Steve Reinhardt > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
