Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009, Gabe Black wrote:
>
>   
>> Looking through my email, I found this patch which I don't think ever
>> got committed. Do you know of any others like this, Vince? I found this
>> one specifically because I'm getting ready to commit my changes that
>> cleans up the ext flags, and this would need to be adjusted slightly.
>>     
>
> This is the only outstanding SSE fix that I have.  You had suggested a few 
> improvements and I was a bit busy with other things.  
>   

No problem, me too.

>   
>> The change is relatively minor, so you can go ahead and commit this and
>> I'll fix it up in my change, or you can wait and I can describe what
>> you'd need to do.
>>     
>
> You can go ahead with your changes and I can fix it up afterward.
>
> I do plan to try to get the rest of my patches merged, but it might be a 
> few weeks before I get a chance.
>
> I did finish running and verifying spec2k on x86_64 (it took longer than 
> it should have due to an unfortunate power-outage on our cluster).  The 
> benchmarks all finished, and the retired instruction count matches actual 
> hardware perf counters very closely.
>  
> http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~vince/projects/m5/m5_x86_64_se_status.html
>   

That's great news! Thanks for this and all your other work. Have a great 
break, and (figuratively) see you next year!

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

Reply via email to