> On Oct. 13, 2015, 3:58 p.m., Nilay Vaish wrote: > > src/mem/cache/cache.cc, line 1272 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3151/diff/1/?file=50275#file50275line1272> > > > > Why do you need to call it again? You already called it once above. > > Andreas Hansson wrote: > It is called on a different packet here.
I understand that we are calling promoteIfEx() on a different packet, but the different packet is request packet. Why would you use the original packet to decide what more requests I can satisfy? Should not the call to promoteIfEx() on the response packet be enough? - Nilay ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3151/#review7361 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Oct. 13, 2015, 3:35 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3151/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Oct. 13, 2015, 3:35 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 11170:22a1ac7a0507 > --------------------------- > mem: Clarify cache MSHR handling on fill > > This patch addresses the upgrading of deferred targets in the MSHR, > and makes it clearer by explicitly calling out what is happening > (deferred targets are promoted if we get exclusivity without asking > for it). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/cache/cache.cc 44b5c183c3cd > src/mem/cache/mshr.hh 44b5c183c3cd > src/mem/cache/mshr.cc 44b5c183c3cd > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3151/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Hansson > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
