> So should we be converting these subobjects to SimObjects to make it
> easier to serialize them?  Joel previously ran into a bug with the
> timer object (the MCnnnn one) where the Tsunami code was properly
> calling its serialize/unserialize functions but the x86 wasn't, which
> would have been avoided if the timer had been a SimObject.

Perhaps better would be to make the serialization of objects use a
separate list from the list of SimObjects.  Currently, we have this
lame Globals object that is serializable (and is explicitly listed in
Serializable::serializeAll().  If we did that, then we could make any
object serializable without worrying about whether it is a SimObject.
The only requirement is that the object must have a name().

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

Reply via email to