On Wed, 23 Sep 2009, nathan binkert wrote:
> In general, I'm fine with ignoring things and hoping it works.  I
> think we should probably change the warn to warn_once.

I think that's a good idea.

> Similarly, some of the syscalls that we're ignoring should probably
> have a warning.
> Maybe unimplementedFunc should really just be warn_once plus return error?

I also agree that ths would be a good idea. 

Not sure if my opinion matters, but I was thinking this same things when 
working on the syscall code.

Vince

_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev

Reply via email to