Has anyone had a chance to give this some thought? Could Kevin/Korey comment on
how hard they think it would be and/or how much overhead there would be to make
translation be deferrable in O3?

Gabe

Quoting [email protected]:

> I've been putting off starting a discussion about this since I know some
> people
> are otherwise occupied, but it would be useful for it to at least be in the
> back of someones mind. I haven't spent a huge amount of time thinking about
> this recently, but I see two possible ways to handle it.
>
> 1. Translation is reworked so that it can be delayed like memory transations.
> In
> atomic mode it could be blocking and immediate, and in timing mode the CPU
> would
> get a call back. This isn't ideal because it would require changes to the CPU
> models which would potentially cause performance overhead for the other ISAs,
> potentially break ARM (more?), and would be painful to add to O3 in the long
> term. It's the most realistic, though, in terms of mimicking actual CPUs.
>
> 2. Make the TLB miss fault invoke whichever other faults may come up inside
> it's
> own invoke method. This would be comparatively easy, but would be inaccurate
> as
> far as performance. It also goes behind the CPU's back as far as who is in
> control of faults/exceptions, etc., and could cause problems with generic
> statistics for instance. I don't know if such statistics exist.
>
> Gabe
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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