I'm not familiar with EDGE or TRIPS, but I'm very skeptical any changes would need to be made to the isa parser to support it. Please explain what your changes are for, and why you weren't able to use some other existing mechanism to get the same effect. The parser as is is actually very flexible and extensible through the isa description if you know its ins and outs. Since it's a shared component among all the ISAs, already involves a lot of complexity, and hasn't needed to change substantially in quite a while, there needs to be convincing proof there isn't any other way.
Also, generally speaking, you shouldn't add comments explaining changes to the code in the code since that'll be available in the history. The comment should just explain what's there currently. For the same reason it shouldn't have your name or the date either. Gabe Gou Pengfei wrote: > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/13/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Review request for Default, Ali Saidi and Nathan Binkert. > > > Summary > ------- > > Make some changes to isa_parser to support TRIPS ISA. Most of this codes, > like 'IntIQOperand', is intended to separate consumer IDs in TRIPS ISA from > traditional register based idx. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/arch/isa_parser.py edde97a6ea7c > > Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/13/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > Done some test to ensure these changes are not affecting function of original > M5 models. > > > Thanks, > > Gou > > _______________________________________________ > m5-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev > _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
