----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/304/#review478 -----------------------------------------------------------
This seems ok, although I won't claim to understand all of the possible interactions with other code. Is it possible for the tick event and the retry even to interfere with each other? Would their effect depend on the order they're handled? - Gabe On 2010-11-11 16:13:08, Ali Saidi wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/304/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2010-11-11 16:13:08) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Summary > ------- > > CPU: Fix bug when a split transaction is issued to a faster cache > > In the case of a split transaction and a cache that is faster than a CPU we > could get two responses before next_tick expires. Add an event that is > scheduled in this case and return false rather than asserting. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/cpu/simple/timing.hh 3155a9ccb66b > src/cpu/simple/timing.cc 3155a9ccb66b > > Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/304/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Ali > >
_______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
