> On 2010-08-23 11:29:37, Gabe Black wrote:
> > src/arch/arm/registers.hh, line 77
> > <http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/227/diff/1/?file=2107#file2107line77>
> >
> >     Why was this added? I'm mostly just curious. Did something depend on 
> > it? I don't like the idea of constants trivially and consistently derived 
> > from other constants being defined in all the ISAs, but it's probably not 
> > worth doing anything about it here.

Alpha & MIPS have it and the inorder and ozone model requires it to be defined. 
I've got a assert that I haven't committed yet, and might not that verifies all 
registers are < TotalNumRegs. 


- Ali


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/227/#review318
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2010-08-23 09:36:10, Ali Saidi wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/227/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2010-08-23 09:36:10)
> 
> 
> Review request for Default.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> ARM: fixed a bug in the arm register flattening logic (FP_Base_DepTag was set 
> too low)
> when decoding a srs instruction, invalid mode encoding returns invalid 
> instruction.
> this can happen when garbage instructions are fetched from mispredicted path
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/arch/arm/registers.hh 47d9409b2b7f 
>   src/cpu/o3/rename_impl.hh 47d9409b2b7f 
> 
> Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/227/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ali
> 
>

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

Reply via email to