The new event queue stuff was committed post-stable.  That was at
least my intent.

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 4:36 PM,  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should this end up in stable somehow?
>
> Gabe
>
> Quoting Nathan Binkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> changeset 82f3a613cc58 in /z/repo/m5
>> details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=82f3a613cc58
>> description:
>>       eventq: revert code for unserializing events.
>>       Since I never implemented a proper solution, put it back to something 
>> that
>>       at least works for now.  Once I add more event queues, I'll have to 
>> really
>>       fix this though
>>
>> diffstat:
>>
>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>> src/sim/eventq.cc |    1 -
>>
>> diffs (23 lines):
>>
>> diff -r de7a82f58985 -r 82f3a613cc58 src/sim/eventq.cc
>> --- a/src/sim/eventq.cc       Sun Oct 12 23:52:02 2008 -0700
>> +++ b/src/sim/eventq.cc       Tue Oct 14 09:33:52 2008 -0700
>> @@ -209,7 +209,8 @@
>>  void
>>  Event::unserialize(Checkpoint *cp, const string &section)
>>  {
>> -    assert(!scheduled() && "we used to deschedule these events");
>> +    if (scheduled())
>> +        mainEventQueue.deschedule(this);
>>
>>      UNSERIALIZE_SCALAR(_when);
>>      UNSERIALIZE_SCALAR(_priority);
>> @@ -223,8 +224,7 @@
>>
>>      if (wasScheduled) {
>>          DPRINTF(Config, "rescheduling at %d\n", _when);
>> -        panic("need to figure out how to unserialize scheduled events");
>> -        //schedule(_when);
>> +        mainEventQueue.schedule(this, _when);
>>      }
>>  }
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> m5-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> m5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev

Reply via email to