Hey Gabe, I'd love to review your patches that you've posted improving the m5 utility, but I don't feel that I can review them well without understanding what the end goal is. If you could provide some documentation on how you see the m5 utility being used, then I can try to carve out some time to review your code.
Thanks, Jason On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 3:28 PM Jason Lowe-Power <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh, one more comment... > > Do you think it's worth changing the name to "gem5" instead of "m5". Since > we're making big changes, it seems like now might be right time. > > Cheers, > Jason > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 3:10 PM Jason Lowe-Power <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hey Gabe, >> >> First of all, thanks for this cleanup. We've needed to update this code >> for a long time! >> >> Do you have a pointer to what would be "new" documentation on the m5 ops >> tools? I was briefly going through your changes and it's not clear how >> you're envisioning people using this library now. For instance, I'd like to >> understand: >> - How do I build the m5 binary for full system mode? >> - How do I link my application to the m5 "library" in SE mode? >> - How do I link my application to the m5 "library" in FS mode? >> >> Before, this wasn't documented very well, but it was kinda obvious that >> you just "had to do it yourself". With your changes, it looks like you have >> some very specific use cases in mind. It would be good to understand your >> vision while I'm reviewing these changes. I looked through the document you >> linked in your other email, but didn't really see how this fit in. >> >> Thanks! >> Jason >> >> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 6:31 PM Gabe Black <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi folks. I just uploaded a series (mostly small) patches which revamp >>> the >>> m5 utility as described in a design document I sent out a while ago. I've >>> done some very preliminary sanity testing, but a lot more testing >>> can/should be done to make sure I didn't screw anything up. >>> >>> One thing in particular that still needs to be done is to expand the java >>> and lua wrappers so that they can call the different backends for the m5 >>> ops (instruction, address, and semihosting). That can be done in the >>> future >>> since I *suspect* those wrappers aren't used very much. If we provide >>> them >>> though, we should try to make sure they work. >>> >>> https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/27246/1 >>> >>> Gabe >>> _______________________________________________ >>> gem5-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
