-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2796/#review6199
-----------------------------------------------------------


What's the reason for not removing the latency parameter altogether in **this** 
patch? From what I can tell it's used in exactly one place: the parameter is 
taken from the L1 cache (or whatever has the mandatory queue) and used to add 
latency when the memory request is initially injected into Ruby. If you are 
going to default to 0, I see no reason not to just remove the confusion 
altogether.

As far as I know, no protocol uses this parameter (correctly). Am I mistaken 
here?

I really hate changes that force all of the protocol-specific python config 
files to change, but in this case I think it's worth it.

- Jason Power


On May 11, 2015, 10:21 p.m., Tony Gutierrez wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2796/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 11, 2015, 10:21 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Repository: gem5
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Changeset 10853:1ce6a4401f97
> ---------------------------
> ruby: set default latency for ruby caches
> 
> Set to 0 since many protocols do not use the parameter.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/mem/ruby/structures/Cache.py fbdaa08aaa426b9f4660c366f934ccb670d954ec 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2796/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tony Gutierrez
> 
>

_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to