> On Dec. 7, 2015, 2:04 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > No objections...but could you give a hint as to how they will be used?
These are currently used by packets that encapsulate acq/rel requests. Instead of using specific acq/req cmds, which are redundant and unnecessary as you previously pointed out, we use this MemFence cmd which is mean to be a generic sync cmd, and should be reusable by any other sync type requests. - Tony ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3234/#review7709 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Dec. 7, 2015, 1:06 p.m., Tony Gutierrez wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3234/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Dec. 7, 2015, 1:06 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 11221:5ab3135651f9 > --------------------------- > mem: remove acq/rel cmds from packet and add mem fence req > > The separate, and specific Acq/Rel commands are not needed, however a generic > MemFence req/resp is added. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/packet.hh c0ea80fed78fef29ad2829b9d93e7bd568c46665 > src/mem/packet.cc c0ea80fed78fef29ad2829b9d93e7bd568c46665 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3234/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Tony Gutierrez > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
