> On 2010-08-19 08:51:48, Nathan Binkert wrote:
> > Why exactly did you make this change.  The FifoBuffer class limits (I 
> > think) the number of entries allowed and you removed that restriction.  Are 
> > you sure you want to do that?

we don't really want to limit the number of requests the cpu can queue here. 
instead we'll limit the number of simultaneous requests that the table walker 
can have outstanding (currently 1). If we don't do this the cpu 
load/store/fetch gets even uglier since it can now have to replay a load 
because of a temporary table walker full case. 


> On 2010-08-19 08:51:48, Nathan Binkert wrote:
> > src/arch/arm/table_walker.hh, line 51
> > <http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/158/diff/1/?file=1792#file1792line51>
> >
> >     We put the standard includes above the rest in sorted order.

fixed.


- Ali


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/158/#review229
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2010-08-13 09:41:33, Ali Saidi wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/158/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2010-08-13 09:41:33)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> ARM: Use a stl queue for the table walker state
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/arch/arm/table_walker.hh 3c48b2b3cb83 
>   src/arch/arm/table_walker.cc 3c48b2b3cb83 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/158/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ali
> 
>

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

Reply via email to