----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3582/#review8557 -----------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the bug fix! Note that the tag for the commit message is 'syscall_emul', not "syscall_emu'. src/sim/syscall_emul.cc (line 249) <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3582/#comment7445> I would drop this comment. It makes sense in the context of this patch (and is appropriate for the commit message), but it is confusing when you don't know what the code used to look like. The fact that there used to be a bug here is irrelevant to people who look at this code in the future. - Steve Reinhardt On July 23, 2016, 6:16 a.m., Nicolas Derumigny wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3582/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 23, 2016, 6:16 a.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > syscall_emu: Corrected a bug on the syscall "read()". > Read() should not write anything when returning 0 (EOF). > This patch does not correct the same bug occuring for : > > nbr_read=read(file, buf, nbytes) > > When nbr_read<nbytes, nbytes bytes are copied into the virtual > RAM instead of nbr_read. If buf is smaller than nbytes, a > page fault occurs, even if buf is in fact bigger than nbr_read. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/sim/syscall_emul.cc cdb94f2332a6 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3582/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Works with CERE codelets (https://github.com/benchmark-subsetting/cere), > correcting the issue when replacing dumps in memory. > > > Thanks, > > Nicolas Derumigny > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
