> On Sept. 1, 2016, 3:33 p.m., Jason Lowe-Power wrote: > > What testing did you perform to make sure all of the protocols were > > modified correctly? > > > > Most of these changes seem reasonable to me, but I know from experience > > that even when the SLICC changes seem like they are right, if they aren't > > tested carefully there's almost always bugs. > > Michael LeBeane wrote: > The sequencer changes have been tested pretty thoroughly in a custom > protocol; the public SLICC files only with the regression tester. I'm not > sure how much coverage that provides for DMA other than checking if it > compiles.
I'm not sure what to do about this. Maybe others in the community will speak up ;). I don't feel comfortable pushing a patch with code that we know hasn't been tested at all. Specifically with Ruby/SLICC, this has bitten me before. I've updated gem5 and all of sudden my simluations are broken because someone changed a protocol without testing it. IMO, code needs to be tested at least somewhat before it's pushed into the mainline. However, I also understand that there isn't any testing infrastructure for most of the protocols, and we can't ask you to solve that problem before pushing the patch in. Do others have thoughts on this (reoccurring) problem? For this specific patch, can you run your workload that use DMA with protocols other than your internal protocol? - Jason ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3591/#review8698 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Aug. 30, 2016, 3:54 p.m., Michael LeBeane wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3591/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Aug. 30, 2016, 3:54 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 11557:5d6fcf14c77e > --------------------------- > ruby: Allow multiple outstanding DMA requests > DMA sequencers and protocols can currently only issue one DMA access at a > time. > This patch implements the necessary functionality to support multiple > outstanding DMA requests in Ruby. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/ruby/system/Sequencer.py 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > src/mem/ruby/system/DMASequencer.hh > 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > src/mem/ruby/system/DMASequencer.cc > 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > src/mem/protocol/MOESI_hammer-dma.sm > 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > src/mem/protocol/RubySlicc_Types.sm > 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > src/mem/protocol/MOESI_CMP_directory-dma.sm > 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > src/mem/protocol/MOESI_CMP_token-dma.sm > 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > src/mem/protocol/MESI_Two_Level-dma.sm > 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > src/mem/protocol/MI_example-dma.sm 985d9b9a68bf20e22ba65f7398dde0193e6ca076 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3591/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Michael LeBeane > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
