Eh, my original plan was more complicated than it needs to be, and the way
we have things set up didn't make that work out terribly well anyway. I did
what I wanted to do a different, less intrusive way, and patches are coming.

Gabe

On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Gabe Black <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi folks, I'm looking at refactoring some of the config code, and
> CpuConfig.py is complicating things a bit. It's a central point where
> there's a list of things, specifically CPU models, and so to add new CPU
> models you need to modify that file. That makes it hard for things that
> define new CPU models to be kept out of the main code base.
>
> What I'd like to do is to add a concept of a "flavor" of CPU which would
> be defined as part of the CPU subclasses and which would be aggregated in
> BaseCPU. If a CPU has a member called "flavor" when it's defined, that
> string will take the place of the CPU aliases which currently exist. Those
> will be aggregated in BaseCPU using a metaclass, and could be listed,
> queried against, etc., like the code in CpuConfig.py today, but without
> having to centralize all those definitions.
>
> This sounds like something that could be useful in other places where
> there are collections of similar, largely interchangeable things with
> different implementations, so it might even be nice to wrap the
> implementation in a python decorator, for instance, which could be used for
> other things like prefetchers, etc. That would be above and beyond what I'm
> hoping to do for now, but I thought I'd throw it out there in case it
> seemed like a good idea to folks.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Gabe
>
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to