-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3115/#review7298
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Could you update the comments in the code? Also, the patch description is 
somewhat misleading after the changes. No need to re-post.

- Andreas Hansson


On Sept. 27, 2015, 4:52 p.m., Joel Hestness wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3115/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 27, 2015, 4:52 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Repository: gem5
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Changeset 11144:f3dcf1be17c4
> ---------------------------
> ruby: RubyPort delete snoop requests
> 
> In RubyPort::ruby_eviction_callback, prior changes fixed a memory leak caused
> by instantiating separate packets for each port that the eviction was 
> forwarded
> to. That change, however, left the instantiated request to also leak. Allocate
> it on the stack to avoid the leak.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc bd894d2bdd7c 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3115/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Compiled gem5.debug with --without-tcmalloc. Ran large tests with Valgrind.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joel Hestness
> 
>

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

Reply via email to