On Mon, 27 Apr 2015, Steve Reinhardt wrote:
I appreciate Nilay's desire to not have the tester configuration diverge
from the simulation configuration. However, the general impression I get
here is that we're making the C++ more complicated in order to avoid
changes to the Python. Given that the point of putting the configuration in
python was to enable additional flexibility, this direction (at least
superficially) seems completely backwards.
If we want to have common code that sets up Ruby configurations independent
of whether it will be supporting various objects representing compute
devices (CPUs/GPUs/whatever) or various ports on a single tester object,
then IMO the right approach is to find a way to make the Python more
modular, not to do unnatural things in the C++.
Why have a single tester object?
--
Nilay
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
