OK, I had completely forgotten about your binning thing... just went
back and looked at the code to refresh my memory.  I thought you were
trying to add something like binning in with this extension you're
proposing, but it's already there.  So what you're saying is that
there'd be a second overloaded form of schedule that just says "here's
another guy who I know is in the same bin"?  That doesn't sound so
bad.

I am generally leery of the idea of having multiple events at the same
tick & priority without any way to order them deterministically...
while you're right that you don't want people to depend on a certain
ordering, you're also guaranteeing that, once we go parallel, people
who accidentally do have dependencies will end up with very painful
non-repeatable bugs.  It's not an easy problem to solve, though.  For
example, if you knew all the events at a given priority were network
messages, you could sort them based on destination node ID or
something like that.  That might be a feature we want to enable for
debugging.

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

Reply via email to