nathan binkert wrote: >> That's better from the perspective that it's not as Alpha specific, but >> still no other ISA cares about the PC in that way, we'd be carrying >> around several (as many as 4, I think) extra uint64_ts, and only one bit >> actually matters. >> > > Could we carry around some sort of opaque ISA Flags object that the > ISA can do with as it sees fit? It could be empty for some ISAs, > though I imagine that most ISAs have some sort of ISA dependent > information that we don't need to expose through the exec context. We > could even start a flags field that starts out as a uint8_t and for > now, we'll stick InterruptsEnabled into it as the only available flag, > and the ISAs can do with it as they see fit. > > Nate > _______________________________________________ > m5-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev >
Whether there's an interrupt available is already tracked by ISA dependent code by the Interrupts object which lives at commit. Why does fetch need to know? Anything it fetches is just going to get blown away anyway. Gabe _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
