Hi Stijn, We haven't heard from you in a while. Have you run into any additional issues?
Thanks, Ali On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:20:06 +0100, Stijn Souffriau <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday 09 March 2010 06:12:04 am Steve wrote: > >> Actually the writeback buffers are only snooped in timing mode (the >> code is in snoopTiming() and not in the handleSnoop() code that's >> common to both atomic and timing modes). Just moving that code into >> snoopAtomic() wouldn't work, since it checks the writeBuffer >> structure, and in atomic mode the writeback isn't even put there (it's >> only stored in the local writebacks list, since normally those >> writebacks never need to leave the scope of atomicAccess()). >> Basically you'd have to redo the writeback check for atomic mode. >> > > As I feared. So I've just been lucky so far and it could very well lead to > inconsistencies. The luck probably comes from writing back LRU cachelines > which minimizes the chance of not snooping changed state. > > I could also try to lock everything else before acting upon a miss, if I > wanted to keep it simple. That way the miss/writeback would get simulated > atomically assuming writebacks can only occur after a miss. > > Thanks, > Stijn > _______________________________________________ > 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
