> On Nov. 2, 2015, 8:56 p.m., Joel Hestness wrote: > > src/mem/protocol/RubySlicc_Exports.sm, line 189 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3177/diff/1/?file=50930#file50930line189> > > > > I don't understand the reason for distinguising _wCC types. Should > > L1Cache/L2Cache types not provide cache coherence? > > > > More generally, if we're going to define these statically, we should > > make sure that they are descriptive and provide a fairly complete set of > > machine type names for existing protocols. Can you please update these and > > provide clearer comments as appropriate? > > Sooraj Puthoor wrote: > I do not know the history behind this change. This is originally a patch > from Nilay (http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2551) and I think Nilay will be the > best person to answer this question.
The wCC names have existed for 10+ years. The CC actually stands for Cache-to-Cache and was used to identify which responses required cache-to-cache transfers. Since a remote L1 or L2 cache could respond to a request, there are separate L1Cache_wCC and L2Cache_wCC. The existing comments and type descriptions are already fairly long. Do we really need to expand them? I think you are being pretty unreasonable here. - Brad ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3177/#review7444 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Oct. 30, 2015, 9:49 p.m., Tony Gutierrez wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3177/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Oct. 30, 2015, 9:49 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 11183:4565e2649f8f > --------------------------- > ruby: imported from reviewboard patch 2551 > > filename temp_nilay_machtype.patch > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/slicc/symbols/Type.py 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/slicc/symbols/SymbolTable.py > 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/slicc/parser.py 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/slicc/ast/MachineAST.py 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/slicc/ast/DeclListAST.py 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/protocol/MESI_Two_Level-L1cache.sm > 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/protocol/MESI_Two_Level-L2cache.sm > 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/protocol/MESI_Two_Level-dir.sm > 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/protocol/MESI_Two_Level-dma.sm > 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > src/mem/protocol/RubySlicc_Exports.sm > 4daf60db14d794e2344a6c86a93bdd8273bc5bb6 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3177/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Tony Gutierrez > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list gem5-dev@gem5.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
