Hi Nilay, Please excuse the slow response. I've been meaning to reply to this email for a few days.
Absolutely, we will need to maintain some sort of list of all cachememory and directorymemory objects to make the functional access support work. However, I'm not sure if we'll need to modify the protocol python files. Instead, could we create a list of these objects through their c++ constructors similar to how the SimObject list is created? Also, I know the line between the RubyPort and Sequencer is quite blurry, but is there a particular reason to push the functional access support into the Sequencer? It seems that the RubyPort would be a more natural location. Brad > -----Original Message----- > From: Nilay Vaish [mailto:ni...@cs.wisc.edu] > Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 9:49 AM > To: Beckmann, Brad > Cc: m5-dev@m5sim.org > Subject: Functional Interface in Ruby > > I have been thinking about how to make Ruby support functional accesses. > It seems some where we will have to add support so that either RubyPort or > Sequencer can view all other caches. I am currently leaning towards adding it > to the sequencer. I think this can be done by editing protocol files in > configs/ruby. And then RubyPort can pass on functional accesses to the > Sequencer, which will look up all the caches and take the correct action. > > I think this can be made to work. > > Nilay _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
