On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Derek Hower<[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Steve Reinhardt<[email protected]> wrote: >> Before we worry about the details of this patch, I have a higher-level >> question: why do we need a separate DMA request type and port at all? >> On the M5 side, we've gotten by just fine so far with ReadReq and >> WriteReq, and M5 devices don't explicitly mark their DMA requests as >> such. I understand that that's how Ruby does things, > > That's only partially true. Ruby doesn't actually make a distinction > between DMA and CPU ports. Both are abstract RubyPort objects and > take the same read/write request types. The only time they are > distinguished is in the configuration system when the ports are > matched up to their corresponding objects in Bochs.
Excellent... even more reason to just handle it in some Bochs-specific config script and not put any dedicated support in the C++. Steve _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
