> On Oct. 17, 2016, 7:15 a.m., Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
> > With this patch, if you run multiple processes in SE mode they all have the 
> > same PID (100) by default. Will this cause issues? I haven't tested a 
> > pthreads application, but that seems like it might cause problems.
> > 
> > Would you just suggest that we make sure to assign different PIDs in the 
> > Python config file (where we create the Process object) to get around this 
> > issue? If so, we should have a fatal if there are multiple Processes with 
> > the same PID.
> 
> Brandon Potter wrote:
>     I have another patch that I haven't posted yet that used to rely on the 
> incrementing PID that I deleted here. I haven't figured out how I want to 
> address the issue yet. The two obvious ways are to make the changes in Python 
> or make the changes in C++ and use the counter to increment the value when 
> new Process classes are created. I think that I might have to use the 
> incrementing version with clone and I might add that functionality back in 
> with C++, but I'll increment the _pid field that you see here in this patch 
> rather than having nextPID, M5_pid, and _pid. We don't need several versions 
> of the same thing to make it work.
> 
> Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
>     One option from the Python side is to use a static class variable in 
> Process.py to automatically assign it. I think there's an example of this in 
> configs/topologies/Cluster.py (and other places, too).

If it is going to be auto-assigned, I think it would be better to add the 
static variable in the C++. I see no need to expose auto-assigned vars in the 
python configs, unless there are cases where users would need to assign a 
specific PID to a process?


- Tony


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3670/#review8858
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 17, 2016, 8:14 a.m., Brandon Potter wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3670/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 17, 2016, 8:14 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Repository: gem5
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Changeset 11692:ba60e4ae816f
> ---------------------------
> syscall_emul: [patch 4/22] remove redundant M5_pid field from process
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/sim/system.cc 4a86763c0b30cccba0f56c7f48637a46a4663b06 
>   src/sim/system.hh 4a86763c0b30cccba0f56c7f48637a46a4663b06 
>   src/sim/process.cc 4a86763c0b30cccba0f56c7f48637a46a4663b06 
>   src/sim/process.hh 4a86763c0b30cccba0f56c7f48637a46a4663b06 
>   src/sim/Process.py 4a86763c0b30cccba0f56c7f48637a46a4663b06 
>   src/arch/sparc/faults.cc 4a86763c0b30cccba0f56c7f48637a46a4663b06 
>   src/arch/alpha/process.cc 4a86763c0b30cccba0f56c7f48637a46a4663b06 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3670/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Brandon Potter
> 
>

_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@gem5.org
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to