Quoting Steve Reinhardt <[email protected]>: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Gabriel Michael Black < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> This is fine, except it doesn't really address the op_rd and op_wb >> issue, ie. having different code to read and write the register >> arguments in the execute method. I'd like to have that fixed as soon >> since it's holding up some other register file work I'm doing. It's >> not critical that that gets done by any particular time, but I'd >> rather not have it bit rot on the vine. > > > I thought what you had proposed earlier (substituting the more complex > conditional expression for the simple reg file access) looked good... was > there an outstanding problem with that approach that still needs discussion? > > Steve >
I though there was, but I might have missed something? We didn't seem to decide on how the isa_parser would be directed to generate that code in the right places. Unfortunately there are little parts of it, specifically the operand index at least, that generic code/the formats/etc. wouldn't know without paralleling the parser's logic, so without duplicating code it looks like the isa_parser will need to play an active role for those little chunks. I have a good idea what I want the code to be, I'm just not sure how to get it where it needs to go. Gabe _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
